With news of 8th edition growing, what codices are you hoping will have a complete overhaul? Which armies, as it currently stands, are among the worst in the game? What codex have you found to be absolutely useless?

BA, CSM, IG, Nids are the weakest

For the books themselves, I think the Tyrannid one needs a good fix. Very overwhelming and confusing to jump into, needing a good 10 minutes to suss.
Ideally, I'd see all the codices written in the same format as the AdMech books.

You should really defiine Worst?

Rules wise - Orks ad Nids are pretty bad, Dark Eldar have some awful units.

Chaos as always languish behind the loyal versions

Sororitas have some good stuff but declining number of models, no formations of any kind and certainly no super cheese formation.

Well, Chaos Marines are still trying to the play the game like it's 3rd edition and assaulting out of onrushing Rhinos is the single most powerful ability ever conceived...

And the model line is so damn ancient that not only is it still full of holes when it comes to upgrades/wargear that don't exist, but we still have whole units (*cough*Chosen*cough*) who don't yet have an actual model kit, AND, we have a "current" kit that isn't from this freaking millenium!

So people have actually voted for Tau, Space Marines and Eldar here? Hmm, interesting...

Crispy78 wrote:
So people have actually voted for Tau, Space Marines and Eldar here? Hmm, interesting...

There's alot of variance in the judgement of "worst", I.e for game health, in terms of those 3.

'Weakest' is in the title, though.

Crispy78 wrote:
So people have actually voted for Tau, Space Marines and Eldar here? Hmm, interesting...

I did, but as a joke. Come on everyone knows it's Orks, I used to play Orks and ditched them for Khorne Daemons because I actually wanted to kill things rather than just die all the time. Orks would rival Space Marines in popularity if they were as Mary Sue as the SM.

Old mob rule was the best too, fearless by having 30 boyz. Also old looted vehicle rules, where you can loot anything but just replace the BS with 2.

I'd argue CSM are worse - I have actually seen Orks perform decently in tournaments.

It depends on if we talk the best lists of each army or the armies as a whole, however.

Dark Eldar followed by Chaos Space Marines.

Imperial Guard and Chaos. Having these two fight is like watching two cripples swinging at each other - slow and painful.

 Gamgee wrote:
Dark Eldar followed by Chaos Space Marines.

Nah. Covens gives them some decent formations. CSM don't have stuff that's as good as CTC or Dark Artisan, or even just plain old Venom/Reaver spam

Legion of the damned. They can't even win alone.
And Inquisition, because I think 1v1, in a standard game, Inquisition just don't have enough different units.

 master of ordinance wrote:
Imperial Guard and Chaos. Having these two fight is like watching two cripples swinging at each other - slow and painful.

IG slaughter chaos, just as they slaughter all have-not meqs.

As someone who plays both IG and CSM's, IG dont slaughter CSM's unless the CSM army is just footslogging infantry, in which case it doesnt matter if its IG or anyone else. I'd put them fairly equal in most cases.

Craftworlds 4% [ 6 ]

6 people think they are funny

DE, Orks, Tyranids, BA, IG all suck quite frankly CSM rank above them. They do however have their own issue's I'm not denying that.

 Vaktathi wrote:
As someone who plays both IG and CSM's, IG dont slaughter CSM's unless the CSM army is just footslogging infantry, in which case it doesnt matter if its IG or anyone else. I'd put them fairly equal in most cases.

IG have such a huge shooting advantage over them.

Martel732 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
As someone who plays both IG and CSM's, IG dont slaughter CSM's unless the CSM army is just footslogging infantry, in which case it doesnt matter if its IG or anyone else. I'd put them fairly equal in most cases.

IG have such a huge shooting advantage over them.

From playing both, I'd say that IG and CSM codexes can give eachother a hard time, but the IG don't needlessly nerf themselves every couple of turns. I'd give the edge to those plucky humans, simply due to reliability.

IG may have a shooting advantage, but they have no mobility. They can defend their deployment zone, but they can't take ground. In situations where they have objectives in their DZ, IG can do well.

In situations where they have to leave their DZ, Guard do poorly. My experience is that Guards "playability" depends entirely on where they deploy. So it's a crap-shoot. They get annihilated in any Kill Point mission. They can't claim a Relic. They can sometimes win a 2-Objective mission if they bunker down, and play to secondaries with a side-bet on bombing objective campers off of their opponent's Objective.

In multi-objective missions, either of the d3+2 missions or the 6-objective mission, they only CAN win if they have at least a couple objectives in their DZ. So Chaos does have the ability to move forward to claim objectives, even if they aren't as good as most other armies, they're better at it then Guard.

Presuming a decent amount of LOS blocking / cover providing terrain, of course. Though that shouldn't need to be added.

 greatbigtree wrote:
IG may have a shooting advantage, but they have no mobility. They can defend their deployment zone, but they can't take ground. In situations where they have objectives in their DZ, IG can do well.

In situations where they have to leave their DZ, Guard do poorly. My experience is that Guards "playability" depends entirely on where they deploy. So it's a crap-shoot. They get annihilated in any Kill Point mission. They can't claim a Relic. They can sometimes win a 2-Objective mission if they bunker down, and play to secondaries with a side-bet on bombing objective campers off of their opponent's Objective.

In multi-objective missions, either of the d3+2 missions or the 6-objective mission, they only CAN win if they have at least a couple objectives in their DZ. So Chaos does have the ability to move forward to claim objectives, even if they aren't as good as most other armies, they're better at it then Guard.

Presuming a decent amount of LOS blocking / cover providing terrain, of course. Though that shouldn't need to be added.

I thought Sentinels were supposed to deal with this issue? A guy at my Local uses deep-striking Sentinels for this exact reason, and has great success with it.
Heck, pretty annoying to sort out when I'm using a close range list. I have to be prepared to turn on a dime.

And then there's Elysians, and Tempestus...
Heck, why not Ogryns and Bullgryns in Chimeras?

 Buddingsquaw wrote:

 greatbigtree wrote:
IG may have a shooting advantage, but they have no mobility. They can defend their deployment zone, but they can't take ground. In situations where they have objectives in their DZ, IG can do well.

In situations where they have to leave their DZ, Guard do poorly. My experience is that Guards "playability" depends entirely on where they deploy. So it's a crap-shoot. They get annihilated in any Kill Point mission. They can't claim a Relic. They can sometimes win a 2-Objective mission if they bunker down, and play to secondaries with a side-bet on bombing objective campers off of their opponent's Objective.

In multi-objective missions, either of the d3+2 missions or the 6-objective mission, they only CAN win if they have at least a couple objectives in their DZ. So Chaos does have the ability to move forward to claim objectives, even if they aren't as good as most other armies, they're better at it then Guard.

Presuming a decent amount of LOS blocking / cover providing terrain, of course. Though that shouldn't need to be added.

I thought Sentinels were supposed to deal with this issue? A guy at my Local uses deep-striking Sentinels for this exact reason, and has great success with it.
Heck, pretty annoying to sort out when I'm using a close range list. I have to be prepared to turn on a dime.

And then there's Elysians, and Tempestus...
Heck, why not Ogryns and Bullgryns in Chimeras?

Sentinels come in two forms:
-Outflanking but tin foil
-average armour but foot slogging

The scouts (outflankers) are open topped and lack firepower. Their "Manoeuvrability" comes from their ability to outflank, and this is good for one turn of mediocre at best shooting before they vanish, as AV 10/10/10 open topped with 2 HP really does not bare thinking about.
The foot sloggers are a bit better at surviving but cannot out flank and still have mediocre firepower.
In no case can Sentinels deep strike unless you are using the FW Elysian list.

Ogryns and Bullgryns both suffer the same issue of being far too expensive for what they do with Bullgryns costing as much as TW cavalry without any of the survivability, manoeuvrability or hitting power and Ogryns are only slightly cheaper but lack even more. Chimeras are also heavily over priced in this edition, especially as the HP rules mean that they can be glanced to death by Bolters.
Storm Troopers (Miliwhat now?) are once more an overpriced unit, costing more than a Space Marine per man whilst lacking any of the staying power or utility that a Tactical unit provides. And none of that "Oh they can DS with AP3" gak Martel, I have run triple Stormy armies before and even with double Volleygun they still suck terribly. I dropped in a unit right next to an isolated Tac unit and inflicted a grand total of two dead Marines. All any of them ever did was to capture an objective on the turn they arrived and then die horribly the next turn, rarely inflicting more than one or two casualties on their targets.
Elysians are an outdated (IIRC) guard army from Forgeworld and require you to purchase another rip-off supplement to play whilst still suffering from the same issues as the regular Guard (IE, gak armour, lacklustre firepower, overpriced units and pathetic mobility[although that last one is kind of negated by the DS ability).

Have I ever said one word about stormtroopers?

kryczek wrote:
DE, Orks, Tyranids, BA, IG all suck quite frankly CSM rank above them. They do however have their own issue's I'm not denying that.

I would further dial this down to BA, Orks and DE. I've crushed some pretty good players with my bugs, some pretty stinky cheese too. Not a both at the same time yet though. In army swap with my IG buddies, I've mulched vanilla SM twice, necrons, CSM, Bugs and Skitarii as well.

DE I've had only 2 wins (a bunch of losses) both were close. I dont know if i just cant get a finesse for them, but given that the DE player himself does rather poorly almost all the time (and will do quite well behind most other armies) leads me to believes its because the book is gak. Not the players.

When i hear someone is starting up Orks or BA I just shake my head. I hate to see other people fall for the same trap that my buddy and i did . Theuy are so far behind the others they should be limited to starter sets. If that.

I'm not saying the others don't need help, but they are 100 percent playable if you know what you're doing. The book may be old and it may feel like smashing your head on a wall playing Tau, vanilla SMS or Crons, but in a noncompetitive meta I can run em all day long.

Martel732 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
As someone who plays both IG and CSM's, IG dont slaughter CSM's unless the CSM army is just footslogging infantry, in which case it doesnt matter if its IG or anyone else. I'd put them fairly equal in most cases.

IG have such a huge shooting advantage over them.

Sure, but thats also their defining schtick. However, as bad as CSM's are, they do have dramatically superior functional mobility, and CC isnt as dead as people think (particularly with regards to tanks and weeny infantry squads where just a couple CSM's can still wipe a 10man IG unit), and they do arent devoid of firepower themselves. CSM's arent going to win a pitched firefight to the last man, and they shouldnt. Within the context of the 40k missions however, their greater mobility and aggression can enable them to win vs IG gunlines with solid frequency when it comes to nabbing mission objectives.

BA, Orks, Nids and CSM should win this pretty easily. Sadly it's about the only thing they will win.

As for DE, I'm actually doing better with them than I am with my non scatbike Craftworld list.

Coin flip between CSM/IG/Orks/DE with BA and 'Nids a close second (BA have grav and bikes as troops, 'Nids have Flyrants and Mawlocks).

None of the above can really compete with anything outside of their own little kiddy splashpool where they'll reliably get stomped by the mid-tier dexes.

CSM, Orks, Tyranids, DE, MT, and Sororitas are what I voted for. Those 'dexes all need some work. MT less than the others because, like Harlequins, I don't think they are meant to be run by themselves. CSM are probably the worst, as they literally have to ally in better stuff to have any chance of winning. Main use these days of CSM is to ally in the few good things (like Heldrakes, Be'lakor, Cyclopian Cabal, etc.) to a Daemons, R&H, or Daemonkin list.

I voted Orks. As bad as it is for CSM and Nids, at least we have /some/ powerful units we can use (and CSM at least has FW to back it up with heresy stuff).

Orks are the only ones where their faction rule actually hurts them rather than help them. When your own rule is actively out to get you, there's something wrong.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
Orks are the only ones where their faction rule actually hurts them rather than help them. When your own rule is actively out to get you, there's something wrong.

You mean like Champion of Chaos, which does more harm than good?

Orks have no equivalent to Be'lakor and the Heldrake in strength, but they have a plethora of decent units - in the context of the competition - such as tankbustas and mek guns. I am not convinced they are weakest.

I wanna say that CSM are the weakest, but I still stand by the fact that the DE codex is the WORST codex ever written.

Champions of Chaos at most only affects your characters and half of the results are still good. Mob rule is going to hurt your orks one way or another and affects entire units; my Plague Marines can still function just fine with their champion being turned into uncooked cookie dough but my Lootas are clenching their nuts every time they're forced to roll on that Mob Rule table.

As for "good" units, for every "good" unit Orks have, Chaos has a great one, if only from FW.

Basically, at least some chaos units draw people's ire. Orks have no units that even make it on the radar.

Remember that Champion of Chaos also forces you to issue/accept challenges, which is very bad.

Mob rule could actually make your Orks stay longer than they would without it.

That said, if you include FW, Chaos probably pull ahead because FW adds a lot of mid tier units that naturally dominate a fight between two bottom codices.

I voted for both CSM and Orks.

I play Orks and find my codex really just boils down to using the same few units over and over or I just lose. I have to spam warbikers, tank bustas and mega nobz with a deff kopta or two or its just game over.

I also voted for Chaos space marines because my friend plays them a lot and he is always fighting an up hill battle without using a lot of FW or spamming helldrakes. Now if he uses FW and the best of his codex (Hell drakes) then he does pretty well.

In both cases they seem to HAVE to bring the absolute best in their codex to have a chance.

 Drasius wrote:
Coin flip between CSM/IG/Orks/DE with BA and 'Nids a close second (BA have grav and bikes as troops, 'Nids have Flyrants and Mawlocks).

None of the above can really compete with anything outside of their own little kiddy splashpool where they'll reliably get stomped by the mid-tier dexes.

BA do not have biker troops.

In terms of rules and aesthetics/model range?

Sisters and CSM - both have ancient model ranges, both are dated books or digital books and both lack any of the 'core' elements of 7th ed (Formations and Decurions boys) without resorting to ally shenanigans.

In terms of function?

Orks and Tyranids - both armies have lost their way and seem to have fallen into strange hybrid builds that go so far from their concept it hurts. Tyranids have become a shooting army. Orks are a ghetto shooting army. Neither of which truly functions as a horde army anymore because their Troops are point-sinking chaff and there are a number of horrendously overcosted units bloating their other options.

Blood Angels fall here with Dark Eldar as well - again, they don't seem to function as their intended purpose...and in the case of these two there are other 'counterpart' armies that do their job and fill their concept BETTER. What Assaulting Marines? SM do it better and have more options. Want an Eldar Raiding Force? Corsairs are for you my friend.

Hopefully all of these low end armies are among the first to receive a new codex in 8th edition.

CSM got the first codex in 6th edition and I have to say that did not work out well even back then.

Tau 2% [ 7 ]
Dark Angels 0% [ 1 ]
Space Marines 0% [ 2 ]
Cult Mechanicus 0% [ 1 ]
Imperial Knights 1% [ 3 ]
Craftworlds 2% [ 10 ]
Skitarii 0% [ 1 ]
Necrons 1% [ 4 ]
Grey Knights 1% [ 5 ]
Space Wolves 0% [ 1 ]
Astra Militarum 6% [ 26 ]
Tyranids 12% [ 55 ]
Adepta Sororitas 8% [ 37 ]
Chaos Daemons 2% [ 7 ]

All of these that I just listed shouldn't even be on there. They are by far NOT the weakest armies in any sense of the word. The fact they got votes is people just fething around because you gave them the opportunity to.

 Ashiraya wrote:
CSM got the first codex in 6th edition and I have to say that did not work out well even back then.

Aye, it was pretty much Hellturkey spam that gave the army any teeth.

 Quickjager wrote:

Tau 2% [ 7 ]
Dark Angels 0% [ 1 ]
Space Marines 0% [ 2 ]
Cult Mechanicus 0% [ 1 ]
Imperial Knights 1% [ 3 ]
Craftworlds 2% [ 10 ]
Skitarii 0% [ 1 ]
Necrons 1% [ 4 ]
Grey Knights 1% [ 5 ]
Space Wolves 0% [ 1 ]
Astra Militarum 6% [ 26 ]
Tyranids 12% [ 55 ]
Adepta Sororitas 8% [ 37 ]
Chaos Daemons 2% [ 7 ]

All of these that I just listed shouldn't even be on there. They are by far NOT the weakest armies in any sense of the word. The fact they got votes is people just fething around because you gave them the opportunity to.

Apart from AM, you mean? Even CSM can give them a bad day.

 Selym wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:

Tau 2% [ 7 ]
Dark Angels 0% [ 1 ]
Space Marines 0% [ 2 ]
Cult Mechanicus 0% [ 1 ]
Imperial Knights 1% [ 3 ]
Craftworlds 2% [ 10 ]
Skitarii 0% [ 1 ]
Necrons 1% [ 4 ]
Grey Knights 1% [ 5 ]
Space Wolves 0% [ 1 ]
Astra Militarum 6% [ 26 ]
Tyranids 12% [ 55 ]
Adepta Sororitas 8% [ 37 ]
Chaos Daemons 2% [ 7 ]

All of these that I just listed shouldn't even be on there. They are by far NOT the weakest armies in any sense of the word. The fact they got votes is people just fething around because you gave them the opportunity to.

Apart from AM, you mean? Even CSM can give them a bad day.

CSM only give them a bad day if the CSM player put as much effort into the list as possible and the AM player only did so a little bit. The CSM codex is THAT bad.

AM is still horribad though

 Drasius wrote:
Coin flip between CSM/IG/Orks/DE with BA and 'Nids a close second (BA have grav and bikes as troops, 'Nids have Flyrants and Mawlocks).

None of the above can really compete with anything outside of their own little kiddy splashpool where they'll reliably get stomped by the mid-tier dexes.

BA don't have bikes as troops though. And they only have gravguns and not grav cannons.

If you're looking for just one worst, the only answer is csm. Dark Eldar and CsM need ground up overhauls of their rules- the core is just rotten.

Guard, BA, Tyranids and Orks just need modernization and a clunky rule clean out. Good formations might even fix ba and orks.

For whatever reason though, gw is still releasing more and more rules for power armor loyalist armies.

Lol why is this even a competition: Legion of the Damned can't even survive turn one as a stand alone army

Ha! Hahahah! Orks? Chaos Space marines? Please, you actually have guns, flyers, HQ choices and even armour saves you lucky people you...

you have never had to endure the humiliation of an army that is mono harliquins, nor friends that will suddenly have deep striking flamer templates whenever you bust out ze clowns.

But no seriously, harlequins are insanely bad, that Eldar and Dark Eldar are actually stronger in almost nay configuration without harlequin allies.

(Yeah - I'm a little bitter, and the deathwatch release with flamer shotguns and flamer heavy bolters have got me triggered lol)

Your mono harlies can keep mono Stormtroopers company.

 Selym wrote:
AM is still horribad though

They really aren't. They are at least a shooting list in a shooting edition. They aren't trying to futilely bumble their meqs across the table into melee like CSM or BA.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
I wanna say that CSM are the weakest, but I still stand by the fact that the DE codex is the WORST codex ever written.

You haven't read the Tyranid Codex than, bro.

 Blacksails wrote:
Your mono harlies can keep mono Stormtroopers company.

Militarum Tempestus? Stormtroopers are known for their flyers, to which we have absolutely no answer for, and I'd gladly take a Taurox against half a dozen Starweavers!

True, they're bad but at least they are usable...

Usable is a strong word for their current position. Point is, these so called 'armies' that are nothing more than a glorified allied detachment should hardly count in determining the weakest army, seeing as the tiny allied armies just don't have all the tools to be effective on their own.

 Blacksails wrote:
Usable is a strong word for their current position. Point is, these so called 'armies' that are nothing more than a glorified allied detachment should hardly count in determining the weakest army, seeing as the tiny allied armies just don't have all the tools to be effective on their own.

True, but as I said: It becomes a problem when the inclusion of said faction as allies actively weakens the main army.

Besides, if they can be fielded as a solo army on it's own in a single detachment they deserve a discussion based on it's viability.

 Torus wrote:
Ha! Hahahah! Orks? Chaos Space marines? Please, you actually have guns, flyers, HQ choices and even armour saves you lucky people you...

you have never had to endure the humiliation of an army that is mono harliquins, nor friends that will suddenly have deep striking flamer templates whenever you bust out ze clowns.

But no seriously, harlequins are insanely bad, that Eldar and Dark Eldar are actually stronger in almost nay configuration without harlequin allies.

(Yeah - I'm a little bitter, and the deathwatch release with flamer shotguns and flamer heavy bolters have got me triggered lol)

That's funny, the ally only army wants to complain that they're not as good as the Grey Knights or the Adeptus Mechanicus.

Tyranids are the last dog at the bone, they're a stand alone army that's comparably as bad as or worse than the Harlequins and taking allies to solve the problem can actually make it worse.

Their best saves are cover saves, in an edition where cover saves are laughed at and even being outside of line of sight doesn't mean protection, they're THE monstrous creature army with the worst and most expensive Monstrous Creatures bar none. The only vehicle that can ferry the 'Nids into their enemy's face is a drop pod that gets blown away along with its cargo before the rest of the army can catch up. Considering that the hive mind is supposed to be the shadow in the warp their psychic defense is a joke. Rending got nerfed to the point where a Land Raider can go out Nid stomping and be more concerned about getting immobilised than getting torn up by a pack of Gene Stealers, you know, the Land Raiders people complain are fragile and not worth their points? Any Tyranid player would sell their soul for masks that prevent overwatch or actual armour saves.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

That's funny, the ally only army wants to complain that they're not as good as the Grey Knights or the Adeptus Mechanicus.

Tyranids are the last dog at the bone, they're a stand alone army that's comparably as bad as or worse than the Harlequins and taking allies to solve the problem can actually make it worse.

The only ally army? Should Chaos Space Marines be an ally only army since they are pretty much only used to grab the Belakor Dataslate in conjunction with a Helldrake or Imperial knights, which only have 1 unit and yet we see entire lists consisting in only Imperial knights all the time! Hell, anything that allies with harlequins actively becomes worse! So yeah, you're damn right I'm upset about it.

At least you have a competitive build in the flyrant spam that we've seen before so many times !

My friends and me have been playing for the last couple of years using AM, SOB, Orcs, Tyranids, Black Templars and CSM. Once or twice a year our Eldar buddy walks in and wipes the floor with our armies.

In my opinion you should let the Eldar, Vanilla SM, Mechanicum, Tau and Necrons play amongst themselves and everything's just fine.

Pretty bad Poll...GK are clearly the worst army in the game.

Militarum Tempestos can barely even be considered a codex.

The army is not very functional to be perfectly honest. (I'm considering each in an "On their own" basis).

 Xenomancers wrote:
Pretty bad Poll...GK are clearly the worst army in the game.

Clearly. I mean those Dreadknights are just worthless. (But still better than anything in C:BA, C:Orks, or C:CSM)

 Arth-Rytis wrote:
Hopefully all of these low end armies are among the first to receive a new codex in 8th edition.

Orks got the first codex in 7th edition, that didn't work for us either.

That was also our first codex update since 2008 (4th Edition).

The very worst in my opinion must be the poor ork codex. Then come the CSM and the dark eldars. Tournamentwise i doubt of IG being a monster but it's an actually decent army!

Tyranids, Orks, CSM and an honorable mention to Sisters of Battle.

Because of the allies matrix, no IoM army is really completely busted, but the fact that they couldn't even be arsed to write in any anti air into the sisters codex when they finally did the codex outside of a white dwarf just shows how wildly outdated it is.

Some few parts of the CSM books work with Daemon allies... but Orks and Tyranids are just a mess. Mostly, it's just not fun playing such out of date armies when everyone else gets a bunch of formations and cool new toys. It's like a kid with a kickboard scooter trying to hang out with all the kids with Hoverboards. He was dope in 2007, but now he just feels like the poor kid.

"Because of the allies matrix, no IoM army is really completely busted"

This is completely false, Taking units from an outside codex does NOT make a given codex good.

Martel732 wrote:
"Because of the allies matrix, no IoM army is really completely busted"

This is completely false, Taking units from an outside codex does NOT make a given codex good.

It does, actually. The fact that you can take units from outside codex is a rule that specifically helps that codex. Tyranids for example has no options for buffing their units through allies. That makes them worse than if they did have that option.

I understand what you're trying to say, but it's plainly wrong. I would have *loved* it if every codex instead was balanced around itself and we removed all allying, since I play mostly mono-Skitarii, but saying that the arguably most powerful rule in the game - the one that allows you to ally in things like special characters that can buff your troops from almost any army - doesn't make your codex stronger, is simply wrong.

It's not plainly wrong. C:SM being good does not make C:BA good. There is no list that includes BA that can't be made better by completely replacing them all with vanilla marines. In a way, it actually makes C:BA the weakest of the lot since it is completely surpassed in every way by C:SM.

And in 7th, anyone can ally with anyone in unbound.

Its not making that army stronger, its either cherry picking the strong elements from other armies or combining things in ways that werent intended, both of which can make an individual *army list* strong, but dont make the faction strong, particularly for people trying to play a coherent background adherent force.

Martel732 wrote:
It's not plainly wrong. C:SM being good does not make C:BA good. There is no list that includes BA that can't be made better by completely replacing them all with vanilla marines. In a way, it actually makes C:BA the weakest of the lot since it is completely surpassed in every way by C:SM.

And in 7th, anyone can ally with anyone in unbound.

Unbound has nothing to do with allying.

You can make a bound army where anything allies with anything, just buy it all in proper formations/detachments, but both in a bound and unbound army you still have to abide by the rules for their ally standing. You can't have Dante lead a unit of Tyranids just because your army is Unbound, and that's the big difference between Battle Brothers and the others.

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's not plainly wrong. C:SM being good does not make C:BA good. There is no list that includes BA that can't be made better by completely replacing them all with vanilla marines. In a way, it actually makes C:BA the weakest of the lot since it is completely surpassed in every way by C:SM.

And in 7th, anyone can ally with anyone in unbound.

Unbound has nothing to do with allying.

You can make a bound army where anything allies with anything, just buy it all in proper formations/detachments, but both in a bound and unbound army you still have to abide by the rules for their ally standing. You can't have Dante lead a unit of Tyranids just because your army is Unbound, and that's the big difference between Battle Brothers and the others.

But having Dante lead doesn't do anything. Tigirius is always better. That's the ultimate point. The Battle Brother thing only matters for superfriends, as you can't embark on transports anymore. BA only contribute priests to Wolfstars, but that's an advantage for C:SW, not an advantage for C:BA. Allying Battle Bros into a BA list is pointless, as you might as well play that allied faction instead and dump BA.

Martel732 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Pretty bad Poll...GK are clearly the worst army in the game.

Clearly. I mean those Dreadknights are just worthless. (But still better than anything in C:BA, C:Orks, or C:CSM)

They pretty much are worthless. They can't even take a single round of shooting in most cases.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Pretty bad Poll...GK are clearly the worst army in the game.

Clearly. I mean those Dreadknights are just worthless. (But still better than anything in C:BA, C:Orks, or C:CSM)

They pretty much are worthless. They can't even take a single round of shooting in most cases.

For real? They only die to grav... They're practically immortal to everything else!

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Pretty bad Poll...GK are clearly the worst army in the game.

Clearly. I mean those Dreadknights are just worthless. (But still better than anything in C:BA, C:Orks, or C:CSM)

They pretty much are worthless. They can't even take a single round of shooting in most cases.

That's why every GK army takes 2 or 3?

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Pretty bad Poll...GK are clearly the worst army in the game.

Clearly. I mean those Dreadknights are just worthless. (But still better than anything in C:BA, C:Orks, or C:CSM)

They pretty much are worthless. They can't even take a single round of shooting in most cases.

From Tau/Eldar, maybe. T6 2+ is still pretty busted for most lists.

Look, now it has been FAQ'ed away, but just to make an example that makes it really obvious, we used to assume that Skitarii could put their guys in allied drop pods. They still could if a drop pod could ever be embarked upon, but alas. The value of Vanguard units went up by INSANE amounts just be being able to ally in drop pods.

This is a very obvious, but far from the only such effect. All IoM armies have the option to buff their units in similar ways. Some might not have a land raider but would work really well in one. Well now they can get one.

Yes, this makes the codex better.

It's absolutely true that replacing each part of the BA with one that does its job better from another codex would ultimately replace the BA codex and that isn't "making it better."

But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about adding tools that makes your army better. The fact that other codex from the same faction are better in every regard does not mean that getting access to their gear doesn't up the value of your codex. Because it does.

Martel732 wrote:
as you can't embark on transports anymore

Yes you can, you just can't deploy in them. Jesus man, maybe you should go through these things a few more times before you start calling what is and isn't broken?

It doesn't. Because it's not from my codex. That's another codex being good. I suspect we're not going to agree on this.

BA have no unit with the utility of Vanguards. There is nothing you can bring in to give BA units that kind of utility. You might argue telepathy psykers, but it's dumb to cast invis on BA units when those could be TWC.

"Yes you can, you just can't deploy in them."

That's what I meant. That's the useful ability, not getting in during the battle. Because my units don't live long enough.

Martel732 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Pretty bad Poll...GK are clearly the worst army in the game.

Clearly. I mean those Dreadknights are just worthless. (But still better than anything in C:BA, C:Orks, or C:CSM)

They pretty much are worthless. They can't even take a single round of shooting in most cases.

From Tau/Eldar, maybe. T6 2+ is still pretty busted for most lists.

Tau eldar and space marines have no problem dropping them with a single units firepower. I am only able to win with them If I get shifting worldscape and can charge first turn with them - that only works against the same opponent once.

Martel732 wrote:
it's dumb to cast invis on BA units when those could be TWC.

It's dumb to cast a beneficial spell on your troops because you could have been playing with other troops. Ok. You just want to whine for whine's sake. Fine.

You might live vs Gladius. But you gonna lose on points so badly with GK vs Gladius. But a centstar or something like that mops them up hard.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
it's dumb to cast invis on BA units when those could be TWC.

It's dumb to cast a beneficial spell on your troops because you could have been playing with other troops. Ok. You just want to whine for whine's sake. Fine.

No, I legitimately think your logic is incorrect on this matter. Codex A being good does not make codex B good by association.

"I'm talking about adding tools that makes your army better."

Getting them from other codices does NOT make your codex better. It makes a given list better, but still inferior to a list comprised of codex A.

Martel732 wrote:


No, I legitimately think your logic is incorrect on this matter. Codex A being good does not make codex B good by association.

Might be because that isn't my logic. My logic is having access to Codex A's tools is a boon to codex B and obviously makes it better. It doesn't make it BETTER THAN codex A or even AS GOOD AS codex A, but it undeniably helps it out... ie, makes it better.

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:


No, I legitimately think your logic is incorrect on this matter. Codex A being good does not make codex B good by association.

Might be because that isn't my logic. My logic is having access to Codex A's tools is a boon to codex B and obviously makes it better. It doesn't make it BETTER THAN codex A or even AS GOOD AS codex A, but it undeniably helps it out... ie, makes it better.

And that doesn't change the fact that everyone has access to everyone's tools. I can bring Eldar units in a BA list. That still doesn't make BA any good. Everyone has access to everything. So that's a wash.

Martel732 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:


No, I legitimately think your logic is incorrect on this matter. Codex A being good does not make codex B good by association.

Might be because that isn't my logic. My logic is having access to Codex A's tools is a boon to codex B and obviously makes it better. It doesn't make it BETTER THAN codex A or even AS GOOD AS codex A, but it undeniably helps it out... ie, makes it better.

And that doesn't change the fact that everyone has access to everyone's tools. I can bring Eldar units in a BA list. That still doesn't make BA any good. Everyone has access to everything. So that's a wash.

I may get tired of Martel's constant whining, but this is one point that I can get behind.

Martel732 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:


No, I legitimately think your logic is incorrect on this matter. Codex A being good does not make codex B good by association.

Might be because that isn't my logic. My logic is having access to Codex A's tools is a boon to codex B and obviously makes it better. It doesn't make it BETTER THAN codex A or even AS GOOD AS codex A, but it undeniably helps it out... ie, makes it better.

And that doesn't change the fact that everyone has access to everyone's tools. I can bring Eldar units in a BA list. That still doesn't make BA any good. Everyone has access to everything. So that's a wash.

Pretty sure Eldar units can't support BA units as they aren't sitting at the 'cool' table (I.e. IoM).
Other IoM units CAN however support others, such as AM priests which can buff ANY IoM unit. Farseers however, can only support Eldar (all flavours) units

 Selym wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:


No, I legitimately think your logic is incorrect on this matter. Codex A being good does not make codex B good by association.

Might be because that isn't my logic. My logic is having access to Codex A's tools is a boon to codex B and obviously makes it better. It doesn't make it BETTER THAN codex A or even AS GOOD AS codex A, but it undeniably helps it out... ie, makes it better.

And that doesn't change the fact that everyone has access to everyone's tools. I can bring Eldar units in a BA list. That still doesn't make BA any good. Everyone has access to everything. So that's a wash.

I may get tired of Martel's constant whining, but this is one point that I can get behind.

I didn't even start this thread. I'm just giving the straight dope.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SGTPozy wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:


No, I legitimately think your logic is incorrect on this matter. Codex A being good does not make codex B good by association.

Might be because that isn't my logic. My logic is having access to Codex A's tools is a boon to codex B and obviously makes it better. It doesn't make it BETTER THAN codex A or even AS GOOD AS codex A, but it undeniably helps it out... ie, makes it better.

And that doesn't change the fact that everyone has access to everyone's tools. I can bring Eldar units in a BA list. That still doesn't make BA any good. Everyone has access to everything. So that's a wash.

Pretty sure Eldar units can't support BA units as they aren't sitting at the 'cool' table (I.e. IoM).
Other IoM units CAN however support others, such as AM priests which can buff ANY IoM unit. Farseers however, can only support Eldar (all flavours) units

I don't need support on BA units when I can support the Eldar units and turn my enemies into fried husks. BA units aren't worth supporting in the first place and that's the real crux of the problem. IoM is incredibly overrated in any context outside superfriends and Wolfstars.

Martel732 wrote:

 Selym wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:


No, I legitimately think your logic is incorrect on this matter. Codex A being good does not make codex B good by association.

Might be because that isn't my logic. My logic is having access to Codex A's tools is a boon to codex B and obviously makes it better. It doesn't make it BETTER THAN codex A or even AS GOOD AS codex A, but it undeniably helps it out... ie, makes it better.

And that doesn't change the fact that everyone has access to everyone's tools. I can bring Eldar units in a BA list. That still doesn't make BA any good. Everyone has access to everything. So that's a wash.

I may get tired of Martel's constant whining, but this is one point that I can get behind.

I didn't even start this thread. I'm just giving the straight dope.

We know... You don't start threads, you just derail threads with your BA talk


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But you CAN support your units, thus making them better

We didn't start the fire

Everything I'm saying about BA, you can replace with any poor IoM codex. Really this started from appeal to the allies matrix as justification for codex ranking.

Like CSM!

O wait.

 Selym wrote:
Like CSM!

O wait.

Does KDK make this a good codex? Does chaos demons make this a good codex? No.

I'm agreeing with you...

Martel732 wrote:

 Selym wrote:
Like CSM!

O wait.

Does KDK make this a good codex? Does chaos demons make this a good codex? No.

They lack the buffs the IoM has though...

 Selym wrote:
I'm agreeing with you...

You were not the intended audience for that post. I know you agree.

"Why should I support ba when I can support Eldar?" Uh, I dunno, why the hell are you playing ba when you can play eldar? It's the exact same question.

Ba has a lot of options for direct support from other codex, eldar doesn't. And obviously doesn't need it.

I put iom codex above Orks and Tyranids because of allies matrix. I didn't say it made them bloody equal to Eldar or that they are fine. This post isn't "who are the 80% at the bottom" it's about the very worst. And allies matrix pulls any iom just out of that.

The fact that you don't want to use it doesn't change that.

SGTPozy wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Pretty bad Poll...GK are clearly the worst army in the game.

Clearly. I mean those Dreadknights are just worthless. (But still better than anything in C:BA, C:Orks, or C:CSM)

They pretty much are worthless. They can't even take a single round of shooting in most cases.

For real? They only die to grav... They're practically immortal to everything else!

Str D, starcannons, bladestorm, pulse rifle spam, 2+ poison, etc. Not having the stackable FNP of a Riptide and maxxing at a 4++ makes it considerably more vulnerable than the Riptide. But it's still busted against things that can't wound spam it. At least it has to get close.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:
"Why should I support ba when I can support Eldar?" Uh, I dunno, why the hell are you playing ba when you can play eldar? It's the exact same question.

Ba has a lot of options for direct support from other codex, eldar doesn't. And obviously doesn't need it.

Money. Time. If this were a video game, I'd never touch BA with a 10-foot-pole.

Everyone can ally with everyone. The ally matrix is not a consideration for codex efficacy. BA aren't made better by better codices existing.

Honestly, you've proven that you don't even know the rules in this thread, so I can't even be bothered. "I meant that!" Sure you did. Your army isn't getting creamed round 1. Half the time you move before your enemy even gets to shoot.

"Str D, starcannons, bladestorm, pulse rifle spam, 2+ poison, etc. Not having the stackable FNP of a Riptide and maxxing at a 4++ makes it considerably more vulnerable than the Riptide. But it's still busted against things that can't wound spam it. At least it has to get close."

Sure, D works.

Starcannons? How many of them can you get in a single unit?

Bladestorm? The units will die way before try can use their bladestorm by the Dresknights themselves or allied grav centurions (this is the logic you usually use, right?)

Pulse rifle spam? FW max out at 12 Tau, and 12 aren't gonna kill a Dreadknight.

2+ poison? You need 4 wounds from a single unit.... That's unlikely.

So not being a Riptide makes it die to a single unit? By that logic shouldn't the Wraithknight die to Tactical Marines since it's also not a Riptide?

 Purifier wrote:


Honestly, you've proven that you don't even know the rules in this thread, so I can't even be bothered. "I meant that!" Sure you did. Your army isn't getting creamed round 1. Half the time you move before your enemy even gets to shoot.

Whatever floats your boat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SGTPozy wrote:
"Str D, starcannons, bladestorm, pulse rifle spam, 2+ poison, etc. Not having the stackable FNP of a Riptide and maxxing at a 4++ makes it considerably more vulnerable than the Riptide. But it's still busted against things that can't wound spam it. At least it has to get close."

Sure, D works.

Starcannons? How many of them can you get in a single unit?

Bladestorm? The units will die way before try can use their bladestorm by the Dresknights themselves or allied grav centurions (this is the logic you usually use, right?)

Pulse rifle spam? FW max out at 12 Tau, and 12 aren't gonna kill a Dreadknight.

2+ poison? You need 4 wounds from a single unit.... That's unlikely.

So not being a Riptide makes it die to a single unit? By that logic shouldn't the Wraithknight die to Tactical Marines since it's also not a Riptide?

It's obviously going to take more tha one unit of anything. I was comparing to riptide since they are both 2+ mcs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:
"Why should I support ba when I can support Eldar?" Uh, I dunno, why the hell are you playing ba when you can play eldar? It's the exact same question.

Ba has a lot of options for direct support from other codex, eldar doesn't. And obviously doesn't need it.

I put iom codex above Orks and Tyranids because of allies matrix. I didn't say it made them bloody equal to Eldar or that they are fine. This post isn't "who are the 80% at the bottom" it's about the very worst. And allies matrix pulls any iom just out of that.

The fact that you don't want to use it doesn't change that.

Tyranids run over ba even with a real unit or two from a real codex tossed
in.

There are two constants in threads like these. Martel will act like GW is personally attacking him with the BA codex, and at some point Experiment626 will join in the excessive wailing with opinions on CSM. Just waiting for the Canuck.

I voted for five lists: ba, csm, orks, de, and nids.

I think the fact you gave an honorable mention to sisters shows that you don't get that they are quite middle tier with allies shenanigans. It's a more limited but higher quality list than ba.

You forgot another constant: bitching about IoM.

BA's are certainly well above the lowly CSM's now with the FAQ's.

While they're still by far and away the single worst Loyalist MEQ book, they got a very decent boost in their MSU play through the Dreadnought errata. A list centered along the lines of;
CAD 1
Dante + Melta-spam Honour Guard
2x Fragioso's w/Heavy flamer in Pods
Death Co. Dread in Pod
2x 5 Sniper Scouts
2x 3 Bikers w/Grav + Combi-Grav

CAD 2
Jump Chappy
Fragioso w/Heavy flamer in Pod
2x 5 Tacs w/Melta + Combi-Melta in Pods

That will demolish pretty much anything that you can try and build just out of the CSM codex.
There's too much armour and way too much 99.9% idiot-proof reliable Deep Striking there for even Nurgle lists to handle. Sure it's not the way most people likely imagine BA's to function, but their Dread spam is definitely more than viable now. (and god forbid, if those Frag Cannons eventually end up becoming like the new DW versions, though I'm sure Martel will still try and claim
that they'd be worthless & unplayable, because... "BA's have always sucked!")

Now vs. Daemonkin? Sure, BA's unfortunately play right into their hands because even Khornekin's average options can out-assault anything BA's will have short of an Invisible unit of Death Co.

But CSM's are effectively just MEQ's minus every rule that makes MEQ's actively work, while being stuck still trying to play like it's 3rd/4th edition & close combat based Rhino Rush is actually in the rules.

There we go.

"It's obviously going to take more tha one unit of anything. I was comparing to riptide since they are both 2+ mcs."

The original complaint was that Dresknights die easily to a single unit's fire

What's a dw version? Frag cannons are almost worthless vs plague marines as it is currently.

Btw, that's a terrible list that don't have to worry about unless someone is tailoring against you.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

SGTPozy wrote:

"It's obviously going to take more tha one unit of anything. I was comparing to riptide since they are both 2+ mcs."

The original complaint was that Dresknights die easily to a single unit's fire

I missed the single unit part. There's only one unit i can think of that reliably kills it : grav cents. Even the mighty wraithknight is unlikely to do it. Maybe a stormsurge but i doubt it.

Martel732 wrote:
What's a dw version? Frag cannons are almost worthless vs plague marines as it is currently.

You're gonna love this.

The new Deathwatch codex has frag cannons in it as heavy weapons. The Vets can take up to 4 heavy weapons in a squad, including frag cannons.

The new profile is this: S6 AP- Template Assault 2 Shred, -or- 24" S7 AP3 Assault 2 Impact, where Impact changes the profile to S9 AP2 Assault 2 under 12".

25pts.

 Blacksails wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
What's a dw version? Frag cannons are almost worthless vs plague marines as it is currently.

You're gonna love this.

The new Deathwatch codex has frag cannons in it as heavy weapons. The Vets can take up to 4 heavy weapons in a squad, including frag cannons.

The new profile is this: S6 AP- Template Assault 2 Shred, -or- 24" S7 AP3 Assault 2 Impact, where Impact changes the profile to S9 AP2 Assault 2 under 12".

25pts.

Haha, why should you have to make a choice what you want to specialise against when you create your list? Just bring one weapon that can deal with every situation!

 Blacksails wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
What's a dw version? Frag cannons are almost worthless vs plague marines as it is currently.

You're gonna love this.

The new Deathwatch codex has frag cannons in it as heavy weapons. The Vets can take up to 4 heavy weapons in a squad, including frag cannons.

The new profile is this: S6 AP- Template Assault 2 Shred, -or- 24" S7 AP3 Assault 2 Impact, where Impact changes the profile to S9 AP2 Assault 2 under 12".

25pts.

First the Stormraven, now the frag cannon. Seriously, feth GW.

"and god forbid, if those Frag Cannons eventually end up becoming like the new DW versions, though I'm sure Martel will still try and claim
that they'd be worthless & unplayable, because... "BA's have always sucked!") "

It wouldn't really change how I use them at all. They'd still be fragile because of hull points. The S9 AP2 thing is nice, but with only two shots, hardly game changing. It's more effective on squads with four of the things.

 Blacksails wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
What's a dw version? Frag cannons are almost worthless vs plague marines as it is currently.

You're gonna love this.

The new Deathwatch codex has frag cannons in it as heavy weapons. The Vets can take up to 4 heavy weapons in a squad, including frag cannons.

The new profile is this: S6 AP- Template Assault 2 Shred, -or- 24" S7 AP3 Assault 2 Impact, where Impact changes the profile to S9 AP2 Assault 2 under 12".

25pts.

IIRC, isn't the base profile also Rending?

Hence why even the now 'lesser' BA version is still so good even against Plaugemarines...
With 2 templates, you should easily hit all 5 models in a typical MSU squad. 10 hits generates on average 6-7 wounds, 1 or 2 of which will end up outright ignoring their 3+ armour.
You'd have to get somewhat unlucky to not kill off at least 2-3 PM's, and then you still have the Heavy flamer to put a couple more hits. (might get lucky and end up with one more kill)

But yeah, BA players should be peeved that DW just went and "Over 9000'ed" pretty much their only really unique toy.

Don't forget the AV12/12/11 HP3 Assault flyer with ceramite plating, TL AssCan (free swap to TL LasCan), and 4 Stormstrike missile and an unlimited bomb type weapon with two profiles that can carry 12 models including jet pack and bikes.

*Edit* With purchasable Strafing Run and re-roll jinks for 15pts total. 180pts base.

 Blacksails wrote:
Don't forget the AV12/12/11 HP3 Assault flyer with ceramite plating, TL AssCan (free swap to TL LasCan), and 4 Stormstrike missile and an unlimited bomb type weapon with two profiles that can carry 12 models including jet pack and bikes.

*Edit* With purchasable Strafing Run and re-roll jinks for 15pts total. 180pts base.

And yet people still moan about Hellchickens...

Purifier wrote:There are two constants in threads like these. Martel will act like GW is personally attacking him with the BA codex, and at some point Experiment626 will join in the excessive wailing with opinions on CSM. Just waiting for the Canuck.

Experiment 626 wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
Don't forget the AV12/12/11 HP3 Assault flyer with ceramite plating, TL AssCan (free swap to TL LasCan), and 4 Stormstrike missile and an unlimited bomb type weapon with two profiles that can carry 12 models including jet pack and bikes.

*Edit* With purchasable Strafing Run and re-roll jinks for 15pts total. 180pts base.

And yet people still moan about Hellchickens...

The champ is here! *inserts John Cena's theme song*

Experiment 626 wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
Don't forget the AV12/12/11 HP3 Assault flyer with ceramite plating, TL AssCan (free swap to TL LasCan), and 4 Stormstrike missile and an unlimited bomb type weapon with two profiles that can carry 12 models including jet pack and bikes.

*Edit* With purchasable Strafing Run and re-roll jinks for 15pts total. 180pts base.

And yet people still moan about Hellchickens...

Honestly I think that is about 10-20pts under costed but pretty close to what it should be. A lot of flyers are massively over priced for what little they do.

A Trukk has 10/10/10 3HP and costs 30pts. it has a single Rokkit or a single Big Shoota, is an assault transport with a carrying capacity of 12 models.

An Ork Dakkajet has 10/10/10 3HP and costs 110pts. It has Jink, 2 TL Supa Shootas for a total of 6 S6 AP4 shots that are twin linked. It gains 1 BS when shooting ground targets and basically has skyfire. So......yeah.....

If you compare the Dakkajet to the new SM flyer it is a joke. You can field 2 DakkaJets against that thing and you will lose in every category every single tie. It is ridiculous.

I'm not familiar with current DE and certainly not harlequins or sisters so I can't comment on them

CSM, orks, IG and nids all seem pretty well balanced with each other if we're just talking about the basic codexes. It's so hard to answer the OP though because of allying potential, supplements, formations etc. and the fact that competitive lists can be so far removed from what a codex is meant to be about. FMC spam nids are pretty decent (or at least were) and they've had tournament success with unusual builds like lictor shame. Chaos marines get unfairly panned in my opinion when they can have cool stuff like renegade knights, daemons and KDK as battle brothers, Be'lakor and plenty of formations and FW toys. IG get some good formations too and it doesn't hurt them that the meta is geared towards shooting and they have incredible ally potential.

I'm leaning towards orks as the weakest of the major factions. I think they're just a bit limited in today's 40k- slightly more so than the other weaker codexes

I feel like there is literally nothing I can bring against my friend who plays Tyranids that makes it a fair fight. He gets swept every game he plays. I'm not sure how he has the heart to keep going.

I'm going to try and convince him to bring a buy a bunch of Flyrants.

Martel732 wrote:

Str D, starcannons, bladestorm, pulse rifle spam, 2+ poison, etc. Not having the stackable FNP of a Riptide and maxxing at a 4++ makes it considerably more vulnerable than the Riptide. But it's still busted against things that can't wound spam it. At least it has to get close.

I mean, Nobody bring starcannons, and if we're talking Pulse Rifle spam, A. It's not as effective as you make it out to be, and B. If they're spamming Pulse rifles (which no one does) then they aren't bringing more of the actually scary Tau stuff. And 2+ poison? Who has that, and who frequently uses it? Sure, a Toxicrene has a great chance to mulch a Dreadnight, if it ever gets there. Otherwise, what? Sternguard? They might do a few wounds, sure. But people are bringing 2-3 of these things.

The Dreadknight is a solid unit. Maybe too good for it's points. But, it's one of the only good things Grey Knights have, soooo take that as you will.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Str D, starcannons, bladestorm, pulse rifle spam, 2+ poison, etc. Not having the stackable FNP of a Riptide and maxxing at a 4++ makes it considerably more vulnerable than the Riptide. But it's still busted against things that can't wound spam it. At least it has to get close.

I mean, Nobody bring starcannons, and if we're talking Pulse Rifle spam, A. It's not as effective as you make it out to be, and B. If they're spamming Pulse rifles (which no one does) then they aren't bringing more of the actually scary Tau stuff. And 2+ poison? Who has that, and who frequently uses it? Sure, a Toxicrene has a great chance to mulch a Dreadnight, if it ever gets there. Otherwise, what? Sternguard? They might do a few wounds, sure. But people are bringing 2-3 of these things.

The Dreadknight is a solid unit. Maybe too good for it's points. But, it's one of the only good things Grey Knights have, soooo take that as you will.

I listed things that have a reasonable chance of putting wounds on it. Not instant kills. You can take most of this stuff off the list of what can reliably hurt Riptide.

Experiment 626 wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
Don't forget the AV12/12/11 HP3 Assault flyer with ceramite plating, TL AssCan (free swap to TL LasCan), and 4 Stormstrike missile and an unlimited bomb type weapon with two profiles that can carry 12 models including jet pack and bikes.

*Edit* With purchasable Strafing Run and re-roll jinks for 15pts total. 180pts base.

And yet people still moan about Hellchickens...

WHO!? It's literally At LEAST a year ago I heard anyone even sigh at a Heldrake.

I've stated that the helldrake is better than anything in my codex, but that in no way is a complaint about the helldrake itself. It's perfectly fair after the firing arc nerf.

I took a 2 year break from 40k and back now. To my memory the weakest army is the last army that has not had a codex update. Seems the latest codex is the strongest. Simple as that.

 TheOverlord wrote:
I took a 2 year break from 40k and back now. To my memory the weakest army is the last army that has not had a codex update. Seems the latest codex is the strongest. Simple as that.

SoB or CSM are the last armies to get a new codex. CSM are hard up definitely but sisters? Sisters mulch Ork armies all the time, they are almost designed specifically to feth up horde armies.

No, I still think Orks are the worst codex with CSM close behind. CSM is only better because of allies, otherwise they are the same trash.

 TheOverlord wrote:
I took a 2 year break from 40k and back now. To my memory the weakest army is the last army that has not had a codex update. Seems the latest codex is the strongest. Simple as that.

Not quite.

 Torus wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

That's funny, the ally only army wants to complain that they're not as good as the Grey Knights or the Adeptus Mechanicus.

Tyranids are the last dog at the bone, they're a stand alone army that's comparably as bad as or worse than the Harlequins and taking allies to solve the problem can actually make it worse.

The only ally army? Should Chaos Space Marines be an ally only army since they are pretty much only used to grab the Belakor Dataslate in conjunction with a Helldrake or Imperial knights, which only have 1 unit and yet we see entire lists consisting in only Imperial knights all the time! Hell, anything that allies with harlequins actively becomes worse! So yeah, you're damn right I'm upset about it.

At least you have a competitive build in the flyrant spam that we've seen before so many times !

Seen so many times but never seen on top of the podium, that's false hope.

 Selym wrote:
I may get tired of Martel's constant whining

Considering your reaction every time someone mentions the Ultramarines, or your large personal complaint thread where you tell everyone how annoying one of your available local players is, Martel really pales in comparison (which is no mean feat).

My Ultrahate is rather more limited than the constant BA threadjacking. Anf the dedicated thread is just that, dedicated. Voluntary participation in the rant.

It's a thread about the worst lists. How are BA posts threadjacking?

Other threads, I meant. Here it's relevant.

Worst army is easily Chaos Marines. They got 4 or 5 supplements and they are still ass.

I love my CSM but I never get to play them for fun. The Meta here is ful of WAAC players and TFGs.

 Selym wrote:
Other threads, I meant. Here it's relevant.

Sorry but is going on about 'BA thread jacking' in this thread also irrelevant?

To be fair , Martel has got a point. You can say that IOM armies do have more tactical versatility due to allying but you can not judge a codex by it's ally matrix, especially when the stronger codex (i.e C:SM) is better on it's own... even then an army needs to be judged by it's own merits otherwise you're just cherry picking units and not playing an army...

I've said it about Harlequins and I'm also guessing it holds true for BA: If the product of adding an ally to a weak codex actively makes a worse army than just having the single strong faction, then the 'weaker codex is a failure in all regards.

Some of these aren't full codices, so not really voting for them.

For me it's a toss-up between IG, Nids, Orks, and CSM. CSMs can perform better with FW, but the question is regarding codices.

 Torus wrote:
especially when the stronger codex (i.e C:SM) is better on it's own.

REALLY!? Then why is not a *single* top table ruled by mono SM-lists?

Look at Adepticon: http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2016/04/07/tits-tournaments-adepticon-2016-top-16-lists/

Top is SM, but by no means pure SM. Most of the rest of the list is Eldar.
Clearly you're wrong, and allying can make an army stronger.

People keep saying that Sisters is fine. They have literally no response to flying. Bring any flier and simply devastate them... unless you want to say allying *can* make a codex stronger, because then of course they can ally in something and you might as well leave the fliers at home.

On its own, Sisters is an incredibly weak codex because it has that one glaring hole. Their best way of shooting down fliers is Exorcists, hit on sixes. Bring fliers, shoot them down with impunity.

I mean tbf most fliers can be ignored and competitively aren't often taken.

That's not to say Sisters are strong, but that weakness isn't as large/overbearing as you're making it out to be.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
I mean tbf most fliers can be ignored and competitively aren't often taken.

That's not to say Sisters are strong, but that weakness isn't as large/overbearing as you're making it out to be.

Fliers can be ignored because no one takes them and no one takes them because anti air is abundant and much cheaper than the cost for getting something to fly. Flying in the current meta is wasted points because you will be shot down.

If there is no threat to your fliers, the meta changes a hell of a lot, so yes, it is as large/overbearing as I'm making it out to be. The Heldrake is honestly a mediocre unit in the current meta, but against a mono-Sisters army? Are you kidding me? A drake or two can completely destroy the whole army. You're making the mistake of not accounting for anything but the current meta, which the Sisters have nothing at all to do with. You're like those people in League of Legends that will religiously build anything the internet tells them to, flame anyone that deviates and think absolutely nothing at all about what you are playing against and how to topple that specifically.

The reason why Sisters can be considered a "mid tier army" is because no one tries to play against their weakness. That doesn't make the codex strong. It just means people are bad at adapting, and that's nothing new.

Again, I never said they were strong (I made that clear in my post), just that this weakness isn't a major as you make it out to be.

Also not sure how my post can be compered to flaming but ok, whatever.

The this is, many people don't even take AA units in competitive armies either, for the same reason that almost no one takes fliers: they suck. Fliers are mostly bad so there's no reason to take a unit to counter them.

The reason no one plays to their weakness is because quite frankly their major weakness isn't worth exploiting most of the time, either because tailoring to that would screw them against other armies or because the points spent to exploit that weakness aren't worth it.

If the Heldrake is considered mediocre in a meta with almost 0 dedicated AA then they are still mediocre against an army with literally 0 in-codex dedicated AA. The broken neck a limited maneuverability of a Heldrake hurts them a lot when it comes to picking targets.

All that being said though, Nid and Daemon Flying Circus lists are a Game Over for sisters, which is why they're stuck in the odd spot of being one of the few genuine mid-tier armies.

 Purifier wrote:

 Torus wrote:
especially when the stronger codex (i.e C:SM) is better on it's own.

REALLY!? Then why is not a *single* top table ruled by mono SM-lists?

Look at Adepticon: http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2016/04/07/tits-tournaments-adepticon-2016-top-16-lists/

You miss the point, I'm not saying that armies get weaker when you ally them...as a general rule that couldn't be further from the truth.

I'm saying that IF an army has an allied detachment from another faction and it actually becomes weaker in the process then the allied faction is a failure from a rules perspective.

Now it's true that in your linked example Aaron Aleong won with white scars and he allied the bare minimum to field a single Sanguinary priest... I'm sorry, I don't collect BA but if the implication you're trying to suggest is that BA are a decent faction or as an ally in general because of a single model, I'd find it insulting

 Torus wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Torus wrote:
especially when the stronger codex (i.e C:SM) is better on it's own.

REALLY!? Then why is not a *single* top table ruled by mono SM-lists?

Look at Adepticon: http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2016/04/07/tits-tournaments-adepticon-2016-top-16-lists/

You miss the point, I'm not saying that armies get weaker when you ally them...as a general rule that couldn't be further from the truth.

I'm saying that IF an army has an allied detachment from another faction and it actually becomes weaker in the process then the allied faction is a failure from a rules perspective.

Now it's true that in your linked example Aaron Aleong won with white scars and he allied the bare minimum to field a single Sanguinary priest... I'm sorry, I don't collect BA but if the implication you're trying to suggest is that BA are a decent faction or as an ally in general because of a single model, I'd find it insulting

I honestly have no idea how you think. You said "C:SM are better on their own," I proved that they most certainly are not. End of story. How you manage to draw it into these weird assumptions, I can't even begin to imagine.

Torus wrote:
Sorry but is going on about 'BA thread jacking' in this thread also irrelevant?

Not when responding to ashiraya

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Selym wrote:
I may get tired of Martel's constant whining

Considering your reaction every time someone mentions the Ultramarines, or your large personal complaint thread where you tell everyone how annoying one of your available local players is, Martel really pales in comparison (which is no mean feat).

I'll go with Tyranids. Their lack of good psychic powers and horrendous weaponry, combined with high cost makes them a schizophrenic kind of army. They're not even approaching the levels of medicore IMO.

 Purifier wrote:


I honestly have no idea how you think. You said "C:SM are better on their own," I proved that they most certainly are not. End of story. How you manage to draw it into these weird assumptions, I can't even begin to imagine.

I think I understand the confusion Purifier - The statement "C:SM are better on their own" was directed to the notion that BA become stronger when allied to IOM. In this scenario I merely state that Space marines (being a stronger codex and the easiest comparison) are stronger on their own rather than allying with BA.

Apologies if I did not make that clear beforehand.

Certainly I've seen really nasty lists with Space marines skyhammers + cad+ nemesis strike force for example is a really strong alphastrike build , but something like BA have nothing to offer that normal marines can't do better themselves- hence why I call BA a failure of a faction rules wise, they suck as an ally and they suck a standalone force.

 Torus wrote:
hence why I call BA a failure of a faction rules wise, they suck as an ally and they suck a standalone force.

Ok, so I understand your point better, but this statement is simply not true. They do have one or two things to offer. I'm not saying that makes the codex fine, but saying they have literally nothing to offer is untrue. They have about as much to offer as Skitarii or Cult Mechanicus does. Which of course is saying a lot when they have as much to offer as a minidex, but it's still false to say they have nothing that people want. Clearly, as they are being used as an ally for the sang priest at the very top tables.

So they're actually quite good as an ally. But obviously one model doesn't make a codex valid on its own.

 Purifier wrote:

 Torus wrote:
especially when the stronger codex (i.e C:SM) is better on it's own.

REALLY!? Then why is not a *single* top table ruled by mono SM-lists?

Look at Adepticon: http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2016/04/07/tits-tournaments-adepticon-2016-top-16-lists/

Top is SM, but by no means pure SM. Most of the rest of the list is Eldar.
Clearly you're wrong, and allying can make an army stronger.

People keep saying that Sisters is fine. They have literally no response to flying. Bring any flier and simply devastate them... unless you want to say allying *can* make a codex stronger, because then of course they can ally in something and you might as well leave the fliers at home.

On its own, Sisters is an incredibly weak codex because it has that one glaring hole. Their best way of shooting down fliers is Exorcists, hit on sixes. Bring fliers, shoot them down with impunity.

Flyers can be ignored. I do it all the time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:

 Torus wrote:
hence why I call BA a failure of a faction rules wise, they suck as an ally and they suck a standalone force.

Ok, so I understand your point better, but this statement is simply not true. They do have one or two things to offer. I'm not saying that makes the codex fine, but saying they have literally nothing to offer is untrue. They have about as much to offer as Skitarii or Cult Mechanicus does. Which of course is saying a lot when they have as much to offer as a minidex, but it's still false to say they have nothing that people want. Clearly, as they are being used as an ally for the sang priest at the very top tables.

So they're actually quite good as an ally. But obviously one model doesn't make a codex valid on its own.

And that justifies putting them ahead of nids? At least the nids get to use their one good unit in a tyranid list. Contributing fnp to a wolfstar doesn't put them ahead of anyone. It raises the value of c:sw only.

This started with you putting ba ahead of sisters, orks, nids, and csm. Sisters is out of the question. As for the others, your argument boils down to ba supplying priests to real codices. That's the definition of a bad codec.

From the past few pages I've come to these conclusions:

If a standalone army becomes weaker after another dex is allied in, one cannot say the allied dex is a functional one in any capacity (and who in their right fething mind would buy a BA dex, a unit of scouts and a Sang Priest just to ally it into C:SM? I can't see anyone answering that with a "yes" straightfaced. To those who do I simply shake my head.

Also, anyone can ally with anyone. For everyone whining about the IoM matrix and saying or implying it makes AWFUL books like BA or IG better your argument is a strawman. Codex A is Codex A. Codex B is codex B. Do demons make CSM a better CODEX? Nyet. Some of you are clearly having issues distinguishing an army list from an army book... or your thinking is clouded by personal bias.

Ah, its been a while since I've seen a classic thread like this..

*takes a deep mile-long sniff of the laptop monitor*

People still drawing strawmen arguments?

The ever-ongoing conversation weather or not certain books count as codex's?

Martel prattling on, still beating the dead horse?

Ah, the good 'Ol days..

But wait whats this?

Other posters gaining rep for CSM complaints?

I'm taking back my fabulous crown!

*parades fabulously with a crown made of the Slanneshi pink and purple neon glowing tears of CSM players with the smell of Nurgles Rot combined*



Nothing but love for you all

I have to admit I am blessed with my area allowing FW for my CSM, but even then I feel that I have more success with my Orks than my CSM. Its is just a shame it feels so bland with 10 Trukks 6, 12 boyz squads, Ghazzys bully boyz with megaboss, some Gretchen and Traktor Kannons in the back.. It's like CSM can't compete without a renegade knight or daemonology.

In all seriousness though its all situational and really when it comes down to it, its more about your area than anything. Case in point the previous Dreadknight situation. Deadknights will fall to grav because of the grav rules but will tank out en. massed firepower. Dreadknights can fall to IK and titans but can give a greater daemon and daemon princes a good run for their money as well as any psyker in general. Sometimes its just a question of who and what your playing with/against rather than the balance seen from some chart from across the pond.

I personally only voted on the basis of GW-only not including FW so I went for CSM, Orks and Adeptus Sororitas. SoB are good but they do need that codex and an overhaul as they can get countered really easily to deadly impact upon a standalone game. I only see one DE player and they usually use DE on a successful level of consistency with stuff liker the Dark Artisan and the Haemonculi covens book, so from a personal perspective I don't see them as bad as people make them out to be imo.

 Purifier wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
I mean tbf most fliers can be ignored and competitively aren't often taken.

That's not to say Sisters are strong, but that weakness isn't as large/overbearing as you're making it out to be.

Fliers can be ignored because no one takes them and no one takes them because anti air is abundant and much cheaper than the cost for getting something to fly. Flying in the current meta is wasted points because you will be shot down.

If there is no threat to your fliers, the meta changes a hell of a lot, so yes, it is as large/overbearing as I'm making it out to be. The Heldrake is honestly a mediocre unit in the current meta, but against a mono-Sisters army? Are you kidding me? A drake or two can completely destroy the whole army. You're making the mistake of not accounting for anything but the current meta, which the Sisters have nothing at all to do with. You're like those people in League of Legends that will religiously build anything the internet tells them to, flame anyone that deviates and think absolutely nothing at all about what you are playing against and how to topple that specifically.

The reason why Sisters can be considered a "mid tier army" is because no one tries to play against their weakness. That doesn't make the codex strong. It just means people are bad at adapting, and that's nothing new.

Do tournaments let people change their list based on what army they're facing?

Are your non-tournament opponents list tailoring frequently?

 Pouncey wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
I mean tbf most fliers can be ignored and competitively aren't often taken.

That's not to say Sisters are strong, but that weakness isn't as large/overbearing as you're making it out to be.

Fliers can be ignored because no one takes them and no one takes them because anti air is abundant and much cheaper than the cost for getting something to fly. Flying in the current meta is wasted points because you will be shot down.

If there is no threat to your fliers, the meta changes a hell of a lot, so yes, it is as large/overbearing as I'm making it out to be. The Heldrake is honestly a mediocre unit in the current meta, but against a mono-Sisters army? Are you kidding me? A drake or two can completely destroy the whole army. You're making the mistake of not accounting for anything but the current meta, which the Sisters have nothing at all to do with. You're like those people in League of Legends that will religiously build anything the internet tells them to, flame anyone that deviates and think absolutely nothing at all about what you are playing against and how to topple that specifically.

The reason why Sisters can be considered a "mid tier army" is because no one tries to play against their weakness. That doesn't make the codex strong. It just means people are bad at adapting, and that's nothing new.

Do tournaments let people change their list based on what army they're facing?

Are your non-tournament opponents list tailoring frequently?

No, but that's irrelevant. Sisters aren't a good enough army to win in tournaments no matter what, so they won't be played there. As a result, talking about what you'd face in a tournament is a moot point.
"List tailoring" is such a ridiculous notion. Like it's a bad thing to bring units that can help you win? Maybe if you're winning every game, you can be nice and not bring your top level game, but if someone knows they'll be facing me, I don't really see it as a horrible thing for them to bring something that will hurt my army specifically.

Martel732 wrote:


This started with you putting ba ahead of sisters, orks, nids, and csm. Sisters is out of the question. As for the others, your argument boils down to ba supplying priests to real codices. That's the definition of a bad codec.

And sisters don't supply ANYTHING to "real" codices. What is the definition of that?
You're just the definition of whiny.

Honestly, the more you whine, the more I start thinking you're absolutely wrong. BA is possibly the worst of the SM chapter codices, mostly because they pay a little more for the same things, but they're still a SM chapter codex. They're not *that* bad. The only people I see whining about it are people that I more and more realise are completely removed from the reality of the game. Maybe you're just terrible at playing your army?

I'm an IG player, and though it may sound odd to say I hope that my army is not buffed through the roof. I'd much prefer that 8th edition focus more on balance and less on buffing armies that are considered to be weaker.

Overall though, I've found that IG are completely reasonable for casual matches at least. I'll admit I have yet to play a competitive match.

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
I mean tbf most fliers can be ignored and competitively aren't often taken.

That's not to say Sisters are strong, but that weakness isn't as large/overbearing as you're making it out to be.

Fliers can be ignored because no one takes them and no one takes them because anti air is abundant and much cheaper than the cost for getting something to fly. Flying in the current meta is wasted points because you will be shot down.

If there is no threat to your fliers, the meta changes a hell of a lot, so yes, it is as large/overbearing as I'm making it out to be. The Heldrake is honestly a mediocre unit in the current meta, but against a mono-Sisters army? Are you kidding me? A drake or two can completely destroy the whole army. You're making the mistake of not accounting for anything but the current meta, which the Sisters have nothing at all to do with. You're like those people in League of Legends that will religiously build anything the internet tells them to, flame anyone that deviates and think absolutely nothing at all about what you are playing against and how to topple that specifically.

The reason why Sisters can be considered a "mid tier army" is because no one tries to play against their weakness. That doesn't make the codex strong. It just means people are bad at adapting, and that's nothing new.

Do tournaments let people change their list based on what army they're facing?

Are your non-tournament opponents list tailoring frequently?

No, but that's irrelevant. Sisters aren't a good enough army to win in tournaments no matter what, so they won't be played there. As a result, talking about what you'd face in a tournament is a moot point.
"List tailoring" is such a ridiculous notion. Like it's a bad thing to bring units that can help you win? Maybe if you're winning every game, you can be nice and not bring your top level game, but if someone knows they'll be facing me, I don't really see it as a horrible thing for them to bring something that will hurt my army specifically.

Have you considered asking your opponents in non-competitive games to stop bringing units they don't field against anyone else just because they know you have no defenses against them?

 Pouncey wrote:

Have you considered asking your opponents in non-competitive games to stop bringing units they don't field against anyone else just because they know you have no defenses against them?

Every time I've tried that I either got whining or more of the same. Personal experience says that people who don't normally choose fluff over table power won't do it when asked.

 Selym wrote:
Every time I've tried that I either got whining or more of the same. Personal experience says that people who don't normally choose fluff over table power won't do it when asked.

You're not asking them to choose a fluffy army though. You're asking them to make it a more fair fight by not bringing things your Codex has no answer to.

 Pouncey wrote:


Have you considered asking your opponents in non-competitive games to stop bringing units they don't field against anyone else just because they know you have no defenses against them?

Why would I want to do that?

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


Have you considered asking your opponents in non-competitive games to stop bringing units they don't field against anyone else just because they know you have no defenses against them?

Why would I want to do that?

Because you're complaining about them doing exactly that. If it's proving to be a problem, you do have the option to ask them not to.

Like how a Daemons player had the option to ask their Grey Knights opponents NOT to Shunt-Quake in 5th because it makes for a hell of a boring game where there's no question who the victor will be.

 Pouncey wrote:


Because you're complaining about them doing exactly that.

No I'm not. I'm saying it's what makes the Sisters codex weak. If we could just say "don't use your strong units!" to our opponents in this discussion and then that would make the codex fine, then the whole conversation on what codex is strong and what is weak is fairly pointless, no?

Do you understand the difference between complaining about a weakness and wanting others to play around it, and simply explaining that a weakness exists?

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


Because you're complaining about them doing exactly that.

No I'm not. I'm saying it's what makes the Sisters codex weak. If we could just say "don't use your strong units!" to our opponents in this discussion and then that would make the codex fine, then the whole conversation on what codex is strong and what is weak is fairly pointless, no?

Do you understand the difference between complaining about a weakness and wanting others to play around it, and simply explaining that a weakness exists?

Sorry, I came into this conversation partway through so I guess I mistook what you were saying for something else.

Yes, I would agree that Sororitas lack a lot of tools that other Codices have and any proper revamp to the Codex and model line would have to include some anti-air tools. You could probably fix the anti-air thing by letting Exorcists buy a piece of vehicle wargear that gives them a Skyfire option, and that wouldn't even require a new model.

""List tailoring" is such a ridiculous notion."

No, it's not. You shouldn't know your opponent in advance.

"but they're still a SM chapter codex. "

That means absolutely nothing. The problems are far more extensive than things "cost a little more." Who's not in reality here? You don't hear much other whining about BA because most other players have given up on them.

"They're not *that* bad."

You trot them out there and see how it goes for you. No invis. No viable death star. No grav cannons. No chapter masters. No squadron bonuses. No gladius. Literally every single thing that makes the vanilla marines good is missing from the BA.

Honestly, the more I hear from you the more I think you have no idea why any given army is good or bad.

Martel732 wrote:
""List tailoring" is such a ridiculous notion."

No, it's not. You shouldn't know your opponent in advance.

"Hi, wanna play a game?"

"Sure, I'm just here for a few hours while waiting for a friend."

"Awesome. So you've got only a whole pile of Imperial Guard infantry? No tanks or vehicles of any kind?"

"No, vehicles were too bulky for the train ride."

"Okay, cool. I brought all my models, so I'm gonna quickly make a list composed exclusively of the best GEQ-killing units and weapons I can field with no anti-vehicle weapons whatsoever. Should be a fun game."

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


Because you're complaining about them doing exactly that.

No I'm not. I'm saying it's what makes the Sisters codex weak. If we could just say "don't use your strong units!" to our opponents in this discussion and then that would make the codex fine, then the whole conversation on what codex is strong and what is weak is fairly pointless, no?

Do you understand the difference between complaining about a weakness and wanting others to play around it, and simply explaining that a weakness exists?

Not having dedicated AA is HARDLY the reason SoB are a mediocre codex though. It's a non-complaint; Fliers are mostly weak so who cares if it isn't there?

Necrons hands-down.

Every time I see someone bring them to a Games Day, their opponent looks deeply into the Necron Players eyes cursing their soul into eternal damnation. Then they say they don't wanna play with an unfun army and leave.


rip necrons, no reanimation saves for you.

Orks need their customization back, mob rule to be a benefit, not a curse, for nob bikers to be priced more reasonably once people realize they are not the super scary unit they were in 5th, and the nauts to be moved up to super heavy

Nids need their swarms to be swarmier, their non flying MCs to be more valuable through better specialization, more customization options again, and for their formations and rules to be put in one place.

Dark Eldar need a total pass to bring back the cannon part of their glass cannon, and make them viable as more than just a Codex Eldar supplement. Return a lot of the wargear and customization options that were stripped out in 7th, return the bomber armor and price to that of 5th, make dodge saves on wyches work in CC and not just vs overwatch, let passengers on raiders do something useful again, bring back Vect and some of the other stripped out characters.

Bonus: Marines- Nerf ASTKNF to just autopass regroup checks, not autoregroup then act normally while everyone else can only move 3 inches and that's it. Bump drop pods up to 45 points, drop razorbacks to 45 base. No free vehicles for a battle company.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Bonus: Marines- Nerf ASTKNF to just autopass regroup checks, not autoregroup then act normally while everyone else can only move 3 inches and that's it.

I remember in 5th when ATSKNF made it so that if Marines failed a morale check and fled from combat, but were caught, they took No Retreat! wounds instead of being wiped out.

And I remember that one glorious occasion when I made a Chapter Master take 17 No Retreat! wounds simultaneously. He failed 4 saves.

Martel732 wrote:
""List tailoring" is such a ridiculous notion."

No, it's not. You shouldn't know your opponent in advance.

Why not?

Martel732 wrote:

"but they're still a SM chapter codex. "

That means absolutely nothing. The problems are far more extensive than things "cost a little more." Who's not in reality here? You don't hear much other whining about BA because most other players have given up on them.

"They're not *that* bad."

You trot them out there and see how it goes for you. No invis. No viable death star. No grav cannons. No chapter masters. No squadron bonuses. No gladius. Literally every single thing that makes the vanilla marines good is missing from the BA.

Honestly, the more I hear from you the more I think you have no idea why any given army is good or bad.

I have actually, back when I played Sisters. My BA friend won about 2 games out of 3, and we did a list swap. I beat him with BA. Had a great game. I think maybe you're just not good at your army.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


Because you're complaining about them doing exactly that.

No I'm not. I'm saying it's what makes the Sisters codex weak. If we could just say "don't use your strong units!" to our opponents in this discussion and then that would make the codex fine, then the whole conversation on what codex is strong and what is weak is fairly pointless, no?

Do you understand the difference between complaining about a weakness and wanting others to play around it, and simply explaining that a weakness exists?

Not having dedicated AA is HARDLY the reason SoB are a mediocre codex though. It's a non-complaint; Fliers are mostly weak so who cares if it isn't there?

Have you read that online somewhere and then just repeat it instead of thinking about what flying can do to an army that has no answer to it? Against Sisters the Storm Raven is an assault ram that can pick exactly where to place a unit of Death Company, without fail. There is no way to stop it from letting them charge exactly what they want, and there is nothing in the Sisters army that can survive their charge. If you don't like death company, then replace it with anything else. When it can't fail its job of getting a unit into combat against an army that doesn't want to be in combat under any circumstances, it is a very strong model. The fact that fliers are weak against the top tier armies has nothing to do with Sisters.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


Because you're complaining about them doing exactly that.

No I'm not. I'm saying it's what makes the Sisters codex weak. If we could just say "don't use your strong units!" to our opponents in this discussion and then that would make the codex fine, then the whole conversation on what codex is strong and what is weak is fairly pointless, no?

Do you understand the difference between complaining about a weakness and wanting others to play around it, and simply explaining that a weakness exists?

Sorry, I came into this conversation partway through so I guess I mistook what you were saying for something else.

Yes, I would agree that Sororitas lack a lot of tools that other Codices have and any proper revamp to the Codex and model line would have to include some anti-air tools. You could probably fix the anti-air thing by letting Exorcists buy a piece of vehicle wargear that gives them a Skyfire option, and that wouldn't even require a new model.

They suffer more from not having formations or super cheese decurions like the 7.5 edition codexes. Thats despite Shield of Baal having them in the fluff and the perfect time to have introudced them and new SC's.

Sororitas are a good army with some nasty units - give them the formsations treatment and they wouldbe quite impressive. Imagine Sororitas with the Gladius rules.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


Because you're complaining about them doing exactly that.

No I'm not. I'm saying it's what makes the Sisters codex weak. If we could just say "don't use your strong units!" to our opponents in this discussion and then that would make the codex fine, then the whole conversation on what codex is strong and what is weak is fairly pointless, no?

Do you understand the difference between complaining about a weakness and wanting others to play around it, and simply explaining that a weakness exists?

Sorry, I came into this conversation partway through so I guess I mistook what you were saying for something else.

Yes, I would agree that Sororitas lack a lot of tools that other Codices have and any proper revamp to the Codex and model line would have to include some anti-air tools. You could probably fix the anti-air thing by letting Exorcists buy a piece of vehicle wargear that gives them a Skyfire option, and that wouldn't even require a new model.

They suffer more from not having formations or super cheese decurions like the 7.5 edition codexes. Thats despite Shield of Baal having them in the fluff and the perfect time to have introudced them and new SC's.

Sororitas are a good army with some nasty units - give them the formsations treatment and they wouldbe quite impressive. Imagine Sororitas with the Gladius rules.

I have never played with or against the Gladius rules so I can't have an opinion about that in any way.

Also, seriously, they could just give the Exorcist a second type of missile it could fire, one exactly the same as the normal missiles but with the added USR "Skyfire." That would be very, VERY easy and quick to implement.

Martel732 wrote:
""List tailoring" is such a ridiculous notion."

No, it's not. You shouldn't know your opponent in advance.

"but they're still a SM chapter codex. "

That means absolutely nothing. The problems are far more extensive than things "cost a little more." Who's not in reality here? You don't hear much other whining about BA because most other players have given up on them.

"They're not *that* bad."

You trot them out there and see how it goes for you. No invis. No viable death star. No grav cannons. No chapter masters. No squadron bonuses. No gladius. Literally every single thing that makes the vanilla marines good is missing from the BA.

Honestly, the more I hear from you the more I think you have no idea why any given army is good or bad.

Funny thing, maybe funnier from an outside perspective but I just read the Deathwatch codex today and the ridiculously cheap melee gear popped out at me, I wanted to know why their gear was so cheap? The response was that they just picked up spoils of war so melee gear is common and cheap to them.
According to their fluff Blood Angels are a founding chapter that is dying out due to losing gene seeds to the thirst and rage and not being able to replenish them...doesn't that mean they should have more wargear than hands to wield them?

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
""List tailoring" is such a ridiculous notion."

No, it's not. You shouldn't know your opponent in advance.

"but they're still a SM chapter codex. "

That means absolutely nothing. The problems are far more extensive than things "cost a little more." Who's not in reality here? You don't hear much other whining about BA because most other players have given up on them.

"They're not *that* bad."

You trot them out there and see how it goes for you. No invis. No viable death star. No grav cannons. No chapter masters. No squadron bonuses. No gladius. Literally every single thing that makes the vanilla marines good is missing from the BA.

Honestly, the more I hear from you the more I think you have no idea why any given army is good or bad.

Funny thing, maybe funnier from an outside perspective but I just read the Deathwatch codex today and the ridiculously cheap melee gear popped out at me, I wanted to know why their gear was so cheap? The response was that they just picked up spoils of war so melee gear is common and cheap to them.
According to their fluff Blood Angels are a founding chapter that is dying out due to losing gene seeds to the thirst and rage and not being able to replenish them...doesn't that mean they should have more wargear than hands to wield them?

Depends.

Does the Blood Angels' wargear get lost with them when they die, or retrieved?

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Funny thing, maybe funnier from an outside perspective but I just read the Deathwatch codex today and the ridiculously cheap melee gear popped out at me, I wanted to know why their gear was so cheap? .

What cheap melee gear? Power weapons are 15ppm, Power Fists are 25ppm, Thunder Hammers are 30ppm...

All pretty normal.

I have never played with or against the Gladius rules so I can't have an opinion about that in any way.

Free Immolators as transports for all relevant squads in the formation seems like quite an upgrade to me

Exorcist formations would get re-rolls or be able to combine into D weapon strikes

etc
etc

thats 7.5 edition for you.

 Mr Morden wrote:

I have never played with or against the Gladius rules so I can't have an opinion about that in any way.

Free Immolators as transports for all relevant squads in the formation seems like quite an upgrade to me

Exorcist formations would get re-rolls or be able to combine into D weapon strikes

etc
etc

thats 7.5 edition for you.

I feel glad that my "local meta" has never touched formations then.

 Selym wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Funny thing, maybe funnier from an outside perspective but I just read the Deathwatch codex today and the ridiculously cheap melee gear popped out at me, I wanted to know why their gear was so cheap? .

What cheap melee gear? Power weapons are 15ppm, Power Fists are 25ppm, Thunder Hammers are 30ppm...

All pretty normal.

Read the codex, the actual book. Deathwatch Vets are picking up Power Weapons for 5ppm, Storm Shields for 10ppm and Powerfists or a pair of Lightning Claws for 20ppm. Those 'Thunderhammers' have Insta Death on a 6+ to wound.

Page 78 says no on the cheap melee. And bear in mind, you're taking a storm shield on a unit of 3+ save T4 W1 models who are costing 22-50 points each after upgrades. Hardly amazing. And TH are commonly instant death anyway. Most targets are T4 or below.

 Selym wrote:
Page 78 says no on the cheap melee. And bear in mind, you're taking a storm shield on a unit of 3+ save T4 W1 models who are costing 22-50 points each after upgrades. Hardly amazing. And TH are commonly instant death anyway. Most targets are T4 or below.

If your expected target is T4 models you're probably not gonna take a thunder hammer to begin with.

Or at least I wouldn't.

But I play Sisters of Battle so badly I regularly get tabled by Orks, so my sense of strategy is probably pretty bad.

My expected target is tanks. Hence TH. And 52 points for a model that does ID on 1/6 of his wounds is not overly impressive, given his lack of durability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Additionally, the tradeoff is that the marine cannot use any other weaponry. No guns, no faster melee weapons.

With 2 attacks base.

 Selym wrote:
My expected target is tanks. Hence TH. And 52 points for a model that does ID on 1/6 of his wounds is not overly impressive, given his lack of durability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Additionally, the tradeoff is that the marine cannot use any other weaponry. No guns, no faster melee weapons.

With 2 attacks base.

ID doesn't matter to you at all if you're using them against tanks. Tanks don't have wounds, hence can't be IDed.

Also you could buy Lascannon Devastators for cheaper, with extra range and even an extra point of strength.

 Selym wrote:
My expected target is tanks. Hence TH. And 52 points for a model that does ID on 1/6 of his wounds is not overly impressive, given his lack of durability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Additionally, the tradeoff is that the marine cannot use any other weaponry. No guns, no faster melee weapons.

With 2 attacks base.

The heavy thunder hammer is also str 10 I'm pretty sure, so IDing most things, and even then MCs and GMCs can get squashed if you fish for sixes enough.

And 2 attacks can be made 4 by a blackshield in the right situations.

Which is what I'm swinging for. Between target variances, model durability and sacrificing all shooting on the model, 30ppm seems a fair price to pay. Especially with Black Shield.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:
My expected target is tanks. Hence TH. And 52 points for a model that does ID on 1/6 of his wounds is not overly impressive, given his lack of durability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Additionally, the tradeoff is that the marine cannot use any other weaponry. No guns, no faster melee weapons.

With 2 attacks base.

The heavy thunder hammer is also str 10 I'm pretty sure, so IDing most things, and even then MCs and GMCs can get squashed if you fish for sixes enough.

And 2 attacks can be made 4 by a blackshield in the right situations.

MCs and GMCs could also get squashed if you can make enough 2+ to-wound rolls to deplete them to 0 wounds.

 Selym wrote:
Page 78 says no on the cheap melee. And bear in mind, you're taking a storm shield on a unit of 3+ save T4 W1 models who are costing 22-50 points each after upgrades. Hardly amazing. And TH are commonly instant death anyway. Most targets are T4 or below.

I kid not.



and just in case you thought it might be isolated

#RediculouslyOP

 Selym wrote:
#RediculouslyOP

Could they be a new Grey Knights? : D

Except without the anti-Daemon abilities of 5e GK that made it so that you didn't actually play a game...

Bear in mind, though, to take the VV and Bikers, you have to invest in some already-expensive-as-feth Veterans. And either take two Vet squads and a HQ, or take one of the KT formations and be forced to fit the Bikers/VV in the same squad as Vets. They probably need their weapons to be cheap.

Note also that C:SM VV get power weapons at a discount already.

They've always been a GK parallel.

The two differences are that their shtick is Xenos hunting rather than Daemon hunting and they openly recruit known Xenos killers from other chapters rather than doing everything in secret.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:
Bear in mind, though, to take the VV and Bikers, you have to invest in some already-expensive-as-feth Veterans. And either take two Vet squads and a HQ, or take one of the KT formations and be forced to fit the Bikers/VV in the same squad as Vets. They probably need their weapons to be cheap.

Note also that C:SM VV get power weapons at a discount already.

I thought that at first but loading them up for melee they quickly work out cheaper than their equivalents in Stern Guard, Wolf Guard and whatever Blood Angels call their elites.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
They've always been a GK parallel.

The two differences are that their shtick is Xenos hunting rather than Daemon hunting and they openly recruit known Xenos killers from other chapters rather than doing everything in secret.

Cool.

What's the Witch hunting equivalent of the Deathwatch and Grey Knights? And will they ever get a stupidly-overpowered Codex and badass new models one day?

" I think maybe you're just not good at your army. "

That totally explains why I'm almost undefeated in mirror matches. A more likely explanation is that your meta doesn't play strong lists.

You didn't address my point head on, you used personal anecdotes. My point is that BA lack units X, Y, Z that make vanilla marines strong.

"Why not? "

Because that takes a big part of the challenge of list building away.

"There is no way to stop it from letting them charge exactly what they want, and there is nothing in the Sisters army that can survive their charge. "

So you sacrifice a unit, and then kill that unit and the flyer because it had to hover to do that. Flyers are not good, even against lists with no AA because of their cost and their fragility on a point/hp basis. You aren't thinking deeply about how games play out, and that's why you think flyers are a problem and BA are not terribad.

Martel732 wrote:
My point is that BA lack units X, Y, Z that make vanilla marines strong.

I havew actually addressed your incredibly vague points over and over. You have never said anything beyond "X, Y, Z." Awesome. Well Sisters are lacking A, B, C and D. Please address that.

What exactly is it that BA is lacking, but Sisters has to make BA so obviously weaker than Sisters?

Martel732 wrote:
So you sacrifice a unit, and then kill that unit and the flyer because it had to hover to do that. Flyers are not good, even against lists with no AA because of their cost and their fragility on a point/hp basis. You aren't thinking deeply about how games play out, and that's why you think flyers are a problem and BA are not terribad.

Sacrifice *a* unit? No, you lose WHATEVER unit the BA player wants you to lose, and then that group of melee continues their rampage through your army, because you have nothing to stop it with.

When you fly in, the flier has two rounds of shooting. One when it enters and one when it goes into hover, and that's even assuming it then gets shot down. So it will even without the consideration that it just delivered a game winning payload most probably make most of its points back. Again, you're just bad at your army. Maybe you win mirror matches because they have to play the same bad list you've made?

you're not thinking deeply about how a game plays out when all you see is the first charge and don't even look at what the flier can do up to getting there. Jesus man, how can you say I don't "think deeply" and then claim you can just sacrifice one unit to a flying landraider if you can't kill it.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
They've always been a GK parallel.

The two differences are that their shtick is Xenos hunting rather than Daemon hunting and they openly recruit known Xenos killers from other chapters rather than doing everything in secret.

Cool.

What's the Witch hunting equivalent of the Deathwatch and Grey Knights? And will they ever get a stupidly-overpowered Codex and badass new models one day?

Ordo Hereticus who doesn't actually have its own army, Sisters of Battle tend to be their go to army of choice but they serve the church.

And what is this mystical Blood Angels melee unit that can take on a squadron of 3 Penitent Engines in close combat and then proceed to roll up an entire Sororitas battleline?

 Pouncey wrote:
And what is this mystical Blood Angels melee unit that can take on a squadron of 3 Penitent Engines in close combat and then proceed to roll up an entire Sororitas battleline?

They don't have one. BA are depressingly poor actual CC.

Martel732 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
And what is this mystical Blood Angels melee unit that can take on a squadron of 3 Penitent Engines in close combat and then proceed to roll up an entire Sororitas battleline?

They don't have one. BA are depressingly poor actual CC.

That doesn't make sense.

That's like saying that Tau are bad at shooting things.

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
My point is that BA lack units X, Y, Z that make vanilla marines strong.

I havew actually addressed your incredibly vague points over and over. You have never said anything beyond "X, Y, Z." Awesome. Well Sisters are lacking A, B, C and D. Please address that.

What exactly is it that BA is lacking, but Sisters has to make BA so obviously weaker than Sisters?

Martel732 wrote:
So you sacrifice a unit, and then kill that unit and the flyer because it had to hover to do that. Flyers are not good, even against lists with no AA because of their cost and their fragility on a point/hp basis. You aren't thinking deeply about how games play out, and that's why you think flyers are a problem and BA are not terribad.

Sacrifice *a* unit? No, you lose WHATEVER unit the BA player wants you to lose, and then that group of melee continues their rampage through your army, because you have nothing to stop it with.

When you fly in, the flier has two rounds of shooting. One when it enters and one when it goes into hover, and that's even assuming it then gets shot down. So it will even without the consideration that it just delivered a game winning payload most probably make most of its points back. Again, you're just bad at your army. Maybe you win mirror matches because they have to play the same bad list you've made?

you're not thinking deeply about how a game plays out when all you see is the first charge and don't even look at what the flier can do up to getting there. Jesus man, how can you say I don't "think deeply" and then claim you can just sacrifice one unit to a flying landraider if you can't kill it.

BA are more expensive than sisters, and get little functionality in return. Sisters also have more efficient methods of deploying the special weapons and heavy weapons they have at their disposal. Sisters limited codex has many units that do their task in an average or slightly above or slightly below average fashion. BA codex is full of units that perform poorly for the points I'm investing.

Flyers rarely are delivering the game winning payload. You've already burned at least one turn in reserve. You cant' charge before turn 3. Hell, I've been tabled by then against aggressive Eldar lists.

No genius. I play other BA players who have their own models and spank them. Because I understand exactly what BA like and don't like. What's at least functional and what's embrrassingly useless. Stormravens, at the end of the day, are overcosted, making them a very below average unit. There is almost nothing you can assault and actually beat with a BA stormraven plus unit that costs anywhere near what the Stormraven plus unit costs. The Stormraven itself has meh firepower for its enormous cost, so you aren't gaining any ground back there, either.

 Pouncey wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
And what is this mystical Blood Angels melee unit that can take on a squadron of 3 Penitent Engines in close combat and then proceed to roll up an entire Sororitas battleline?

They don't have one. BA are depressingly poor actual CC.

That doesn't make sense.

That's like saying that Tau are bad at shooting things.

It isn't true. And the unit isn't mystical, it's called Death Company. They can get buffed to have so many attacks and rerolls that there is vedry little they can't chew right through. But he wouldn't even send it on the penitents. ASWhy would he want to? He gets to pick where to hit you, why would he hit you where you might actually have a chance of handling it?

I think you're just lying about being able to win, Martel. And this gak

I've been tabled by then against aggressive Eldar lists.

what relevance does that have against Sisters? "OH THE BEST CODEX THAT EVERYONE AGREES IS OP CAN TAKE ME DOWN, SO MY THINGS ARE BAD AGAINST SISTERS!" what?

BA get lots of functionality in return. They have many more options to tailor their units. "More efficient methods" are you kidding me? They have one squad that is good at deploying meltas, that's it. Sisters have three things exactly that can fight. 1) cheap bolters, and everyone agrees bolters are the best thing ever, right? One squad that can come in from the table edges as reserves. You seem to love reserves, right? You think those are great! (If you don't come in as reserves they will die as they are expensive as feth and sit in a rhino chassis and have the same T3 as everyoen else in the army) and lastly they have exorcists, who are an RNG powerhouse or dud, depending on how many shots they get.

You are just whiny.

 Pouncey wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
And what is this mystical Blood Angels melee unit that can take on a squadron of 3 Penitent Engines in close combat and then proceed to roll up an entire Sororitas battleline?

They don't have one. BA are depressingly poor actual CC.

That doesn't make sense.

That's like saying that Tau are bad at shooting things.

I know it doesn't make sense, but it is absolutely true in 7th ed. Which is why BA are in running for worst codex in the game down with CSM, Orks, DE.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
And what is this mystical Blood Angels melee unit that can take on a squadron of 3 Penitent Engines in close combat and then proceed to roll up an entire Sororitas battleline?

They don't have one. BA are depressingly poor actual CC.

That doesn't make sense.

That's like saying that Tau are bad at shooting things.

It isn't true. And the unit isn't mystical, it's called Death Company. They can get buffed to have so many attacks and rerolls that there is vedry little they can't chew right through. But he wouldn't even send it on the penitents. ASWhy would he want to? He gets to pick where to hit you, why would he hit you where you might actually have a chance of handling it?

DC is not that great. They can't multi-assault without crippling themselves. If they get bogged down by counter assaults, they are incredibly mediocre. They are 100% reliant on getting the change. Also, frequently, I need my DC on the table turn 1 if I'm facing a pod alpha strike list. You can't afford to ever have them on a raven. Turn 3 is too late too much of the time. Compared to Wraiths and TWC, DC are a terrible, terrible unit. There's actually a lot of things DC can't chew though. Which is why BA aren't that good in assault in 7th ed.

I understand the disconnect now. You think DC are actually good, when they are just fragile bullies that can't take on real CC units.

Martel732 wrote:
DC is not that great. They can't multi-assault without crippling themselves. If they get bogged down by counter assaults,

Ah yes, the famous Sisters assaulting units. (If they are dumb enough to have Repentias, charge those first. They simply die if they aren't allowed to charge, and even if they are... well, they usually die as a result of I1)

they are incredibly mediocre. They are 100% reliant on getting the charge.

Yes, I just told you how to do that. You're welcome.

Also, frequently, I need my DC on the table turn 1 if I'm facing a pod alpha strike list.

Ah yes, the famous Sisters Alpha Strike.

You can't afford to ever have them on a raven.

Yes you can, My BA friend does it all the time.

Turn 3 is too late too much of the time.

No, Sisters will not have tabled you by then.

Compared to Wraiths and TWC, DC are a terrible, terrible unit.

Ah yes, the famous Sisters of Battle Thunderwolf Cavalry, supported by the Sister-Wraiths. (also, "they're a terrible terrible unit because they're not as good as the two most OP units in the game" shows exactly what your whine is based on. Ridiculous)

There's actually a lot of things DC can't chew though.

In Sisters? No. Nothing.

Awesome how many times I have to remind you that we're talking about sisters here, not the top tier codices.

I'm not tailoring for Sisters. I build a list and THEN find out who I'm playing. It's entire possible that BA might have an advantage vs Sisters heads up, but be far worse vs the field. That still makes them an inferior codex.

Martel732 wrote:
I'm not tailoring for Sisters. I build a list and THEN find out who I'm playing. It's entire possible that BA might have an advantage vs Sisters heads up, but be far worse vs the field. That still makes them an inferior codex.

Yes, it would. But they're NOT. Even if you don't tailor, you're more than fine against Sisters. You're just whiny, and every single time we need an example you drag up Eldar, TWC and Wraiths. It's mind blowing that you don't even take a step back and go "whoa, I keep comparing my army to the top armies even when I'm saying that it's worse than the low tier armies... that's messed up of me! Maybe I'm just whiny?"

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
And what is this mystical Blood Angels melee unit that can take on a squadron of 3 Penitent Engines in close combat and then proceed to roll up an entire Sororitas battleline?

They don't have one. BA are depressingly poor actual CC.

That doesn't make sense.

That's like saying that Tau are bad at shooting things.

It isn't true. And the unit isn't mystical, it's called Death Company. They can get buffed to have so many attacks and rerolls that there is vedry little they can't chew right through. But he wouldn't even send it on the penitents. ASWhy would he want to? He gets to pick where to hit you, why would he hit you where you might actually have a chance of handling it?

...Because you said the Sisters have zero melee units that can take down the Death Company.

Penitent Engines sure as feth ain't a ranged unit.

Also how about a large Battle Conclave made of Death-Cult Assassins and Crusaders with a couple of Priests for buffs? Cheaper than the Penitent Engines. I took down an 8-man squad of vanilla Marine Honor Guard in one round with a Battle Conclave of 3-4 Crusaders and 5-6 DCAs back in 5th and the unit hasn't changed much since then. Yeah, power swords are AP3 now but Death Company don't have Artificer or Terminator Armor so it's moot. And I dealt enough overkill to those Honor Guard that it wasn't a matter of getting barely lucky enough. The Crusaders go in front to soak up a bit of fire, then the DCAs just BUTCHER things. I've never been able to use a Battle Conclave effectively after that first time, because they dealt such brutal overkill that every time I field one, it gets targeted by every ranged weapon my opponent has in range until being wiped out. She ignores my tanks with her Lootas to kill a Battle Conclave, that is how much they terrify her.

I think you're just lying about being able to win, Martel. And this gak

I've been tabled by then against aggressive Eldar lists.

what relevance does that have against Sisters? "OH THE BEST CODEX THAT EVERYONE AGREES IS OP CAN TAKE ME DOWN, SO MY THINGS ARE BAD AGAINST SISTERS!" what?

BA get lots of functionality in return. They have many more options to tailor their units. "More efficient methods" are you kidding me? They have one squad that is good at deploying meltas, that's it. Sisters have three things exactly that can fight. 1) cheap bolters, and everyone agrees bolters are the best thing ever, right? One squad that can come in from the table edges as reserves. You seem to love reserves, right? You think those are great! (If you don't come in as reserves they will die as they are expensive as feth and sit in a rhino chassis and have the same T3 as everyoen else in the army) and lastly they have exorcists, who are an RNG powerhouse or dud, depending on how many shots they get.

You are just whiny.

Aren't Dominions fairly comparable in cost to a Battle Sisters Squad of similar size and equipment, with like 20 points layered on top to purchase the squad to to begin with? Did they get a huge price hike?

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I'm not tailoring for Sisters. I build a list and THEN find out who I'm playing. It's entire possible that BA might have an advantage vs Sisters heads up, but be far worse vs the field. That still makes them an inferior codex.

Yes, it would. But they're NOT. Even if you don't tailor, you're more than fine against Sisters. You're just whiny, and every single time we need an example you drag up Eldar, TWC and Wraiths. It's mind blowing that you don't even take a step back and go "whoa, I keep comparing my army to the top armies even when I'm saying that it's worse than the low tier armies... that's messed up of me! Maybe I'm just whiny?"

It's because all armies should be approximately even. "More than fine" is not a situation the BA are ever in. BA can't shoot well, and can't assault well. At least by 7th ed standards. BA vs the field are inferior to sisters, making them an inferior overall codex. Head to head means nothing.

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I'm not tailoring for Sisters. I build a list and THEN find out who I'm playing. It's entire possible that BA might have an advantage vs Sisters heads up, but be far worse vs the field. That still makes them an inferior codex.

Yes, it would. But they're NOT. Even if you don't tailor, you're more than fine against Sisters. You're just whiny, and every single time we need an example you drag up Eldar, TWC and Wraiths. It's mind blowing that you don't even take a step back and go "whoa, I keep comparing my army to the top armies even when I'm saying that it's worse than the low tier armies... that's messed up of me! Maybe I'm just whiny?"

I don't know why, but when I read your posts, I get the feeling you're talking really fast, really loud, and are very excited and more than a bit angry.

Am I somehow reading tone into your posts that isn't there?

 Pouncey wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I'm not tailoring for Sisters. I build a list and THEN find out who I'm playing. It's entire possible that BA might have an advantage vs Sisters heads up, but be far worse vs the field. That still makes them an inferior codex.

Yes, it would. But they're NOT. Even if you don't tailor, you're more than fine against Sisters. You're just whiny, and every single time we need an example you drag up Eldar, TWC and Wraiths. It's mind blowing that you don't even take a step back and go "whoa, I keep comparing my army to the top armies even when I'm saying that it's worse than the low tier armies... that's messed up of me! Maybe I'm just whiny?"

I don't know why, but when I read your posts, I get the feeling you're talking really fast, really loud, and are very excited and more than a bit angry.

Am I somehow reading tone into your posts that isn't there?

I'm pretty sure I could beat Purifier's concept of BA pretty consistently with both my BA and Sisters. Stormravens are bad. Reserved assault units are even worse.

Voted - Orks, Tyranids, Dark Eldar, Chaos Space Marines and Adeptus Sororitas.

CB

Captain Brown wrote:
Voted - Orks, Tyranids, Dark Eldar, Chaos Space Marines and Adeptus Sororitas.

CB

Adepta. With an A at the end.

They are female, not male.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I'm not tailoring for Sisters. I build a list and THEN find out who I'm playing. It's entire possible that BA might have an advantage vs Sisters heads up, but be far worse vs the field. That still makes them an inferior codex.

Yes, it would. But they're NOT. Even if you don't tailor, you're more than fine against Sisters. You're just whiny, and every single time we need an example you drag up Eldar, TWC and Wraiths. It's mind blowing that you don't even take a step back and go "whoa, I keep comparing my army to the top armies even when I'm saying that it's worse than the low tier armies... that's messed up of me! Maybe I'm just whiny?"

I don't know why, but when I read your posts, I get the feeling you're talking really fast, really loud, and are very excited and more than a bit angry.

Am I somehow reading tone into your posts that isn't there?

You are. And Penitent Engines are proably the worst unit in the codex. If you're being allowed to use them effectively, you are not playing anything like what he is talking about An open topped F11, R10 walker for 80 points? Maybe if the FAQ gave them more attacks? I don't know if it did, but even then, they are terrible.

Compare it to a BA dreadnought: The Penitent has 2 less BS, 1 less Strength, 1 less front and side armour., 1 less initiative and one more attack. Furthermore, where the Penitents have flamers, meaning they are useless unless they manage to walk up (with 6 inches move and too big to hide behind anything) the dread has a multi melta. The dread also isn't open topped. The dread also has the option of being dropped in by pod. The dread is just better all around. And yet dreads are (rightly so) considered very bad. The Penitent Engines are worse.

They're so easy to pop as they lumber along, that they shouldn't really get into combat. But even if the BA brainfarts and does choose them to charge into, well, they have S5 on the charge, so they'll still rip right through it.

Martel732 wrote:
I'm pretty sure I could beat Purifier's concept of BA pretty consistently with both my BA and Sisters. Stormravens are bad. Reserved assault units are even worse.

I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be able to handle it if I gave you a 1000 point handicap, but at this point I'm too tired of your whine, so I would never have the patience to play you.

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
""List tailoring" is such a ridiculous notion."

No, it's not. You shouldn't know your opponent in advance.

Why not?

Martel732 wrote:

"but they're still a SM chapter codex. "

That means absolutely nothing. The problems are far more extensive than things "cost a little more." Who's not in reality here? You don't hear much other whining about BA because most other players have given up on them.

"They're not *that* bad."

You trot them out there and see how it goes for you. No invis. No viable death star. No grav cannons. No chapter masters. No squadron bonuses. No gladius. Literally every single thing that makes the vanilla marines good is missing from the BA.

Honestly, the more I hear from you the more I think you have no idea why any given army is good or bad.

I have actually, back when I played Sisters. My BA friend won about 2 games out of 3, and we did a list swap. I beat him with BA. Had a great game. I think maybe you're just not good at your army.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


Because you're complaining about them doing exactly that.

No I'm not. I'm saying it's what makes the Sisters codex weak. If we could just say "don't use your strong units!" to our opponents in this discussion and then that would make the codex fine, then the whole conversation on what codex is strong and what is weak is fairly pointless, no?

Do you understand the difference between complaining about a weakness and wanting others to play around it, and simply explaining that a weakness exists?

Not having dedicated AA is HARDLY the reason SoB are a mediocre codex though. It's a non-complaint; Fliers are mostly weak so who cares if it isn't there?

Have you read that online somewhere and then just repeat it instead of thinking about what flying can do to an army that has no answer to it? Against Sisters the Storm Raven is an assault ram that can pick exactly where to place a unit of Death Company, without fail. There is no way to stop it from letting them charge exactly what they want, and there is nothing in the Sisters army that can survive their charge. If you don't like death company, then replace it with anything else. When it can't fail its job of getting a unit into combat against an army that doesn't want to be in combat under any circumstances, it is a very strong model. The fact that fliers are weak against the top tier armies has nothing to do with Sisters.

I literally LOL'd at the notion of a Storm raven being used to transport anything. That's a T3 charge at earliest and Death Company have Jump Packs. Nothing without that minimum of mobility + being a melee unit isn't going to be worth running in the first place.

So yes it IS a non-issue. Last time I played CSM with no fliers or AA it made no difference in the outcome because of how the codex operates. That's easily the bottom codex there.

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I'm not tailoring for Sisters. I build a list and THEN find out who I'm playing. It's entire possible that BA might have an advantage vs Sisters heads up, but be far worse vs the field. That still makes them an inferior codex.

Yes, it would. But they're NOT. Even if you don't tailor, you're more than fine against Sisters. You're just whiny, and every single time we need an example you drag up Eldar, TWC and Wraiths. It's mind blowing that you don't even take a step back and go "whoa, I keep comparing my army to the top armies even when I'm saying that it's worse than the low tier armies... that's messed up of me! Maybe I'm just whiny?"

I don't know why, but when I read your posts, I get the feeling you're talking really fast, really loud, and are very excited and more than a bit angry.

Am I somehow reading tone into your posts that isn't there?

You are. And Penitent Engines are proably the worst unit in the codex. If you're being allowed to use them effectively, you are not playing anything like what he is talking about An open topped F11, R10 walker for 80 points? Maybe if the FAQ gave them more attacks? I don't know if it did, but even then, they are terrible.

Compare it to a BA dreadnought: The Penitent has 2 less BS, 1 less Strength, 1 less front and side armour., 1 less initiative and one more attack. Furthermore, where the Penitents have flamers, meaning they are useless unless they manage to walk up (with 6 inches move and too big to hide behind anything) the dread has a multi melta. The dread also isn't open topped. The dread also has the option of being dropped in by pod. The dread is just better all around. And yet dreads are (rightly so) considered very bad. The Penitent Engines are worse.

They're so easy to pop as they lumber along, that they shouldn't really get into combat. But even if the BA brainfarts and does choose them to charge into, well, they have S5 on the charge, so they'll still rip right through it.

A few things. First, we're talking about Death Company Marines' ability to fight Penitent Engines in melee, not a Dreadnought versus Dreadnought comparison. If you're gonna use the Dreadnought then we can just have Melta Dominions melt the crap out of it like they do to any other vehicle or rain Exorcist missiles on it until it dies. Stop changing the subject when you realize that Sisters actually can do stuff against Blood Angels sometimes.

Second, Penitent Engines have d6+1 attacks, Maybe more with the revamp to dreadnought attacks in the FAQs once they get to Sisters. And for every unsaved wound they inflict, they get another attack immediately. They have Dreadnought CCWs, so armor saves, ability to wound, and FNP are irrelevant. And they effectively have the "fixed" version of the Furioso Blood Talons' special rule.

Third, a Penitent Engine's ballistic skill is completely irrelevant to everything, as its only ranged weapons are two heavy flamers, which don't roll to hit. It serves only to let it actually fire its flamers.

Fourth, six heavy flamers firing Overwatch against T4 infantry are very, very likely going to cause some casualties. Assuming flamers on Dreadnoughts CAN be fired as Overwatch, anyways.

Fifth, one less strength on the PE is irrelevant, as it's impossible to have a Strength above 10 anyways and if all of a Dreadnought's CCWs are busted (the only time its base strength would matter in this case) then it doesn't matter what its stats are, it's going to die in melee to infantry with Krak Grenades or watch those infantry run away on the grounds they can't physically hurt it.

Sixth, Death Company with Strength 5 glance a Penitent Engine on 6s. They need to inflict 6 6s to take out all of them, which requires around 36 hits on average. I don't know the Death Company's WS but I imagine they're hitting on 4s. Which means that the Death Company squad needs to be able to deliver around 72 attacks to take out the squadron, unless I miscalculated something. And if they fail to take them out, they're stuck with krak grenades.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I'm not tailoring for Sisters. I build a list and THEN find out who I'm playing. It's entire possible that BA might have an advantage vs Sisters heads up, but be far worse vs the field. That still makes them an inferior codex.

Yes, it would. But they're NOT. Even if you don't tailor, you're more than fine against Sisters. You're just whiny, and every single time we need an example you drag up Eldar, TWC and Wraiths. It's mind blowing that you don't even take a step back and go "whoa, I keep comparing my army to the top armies even when I'm saying that it's worse than the low tier armies... that's messed up of me! Maybe I'm just whiny?"

I don't know why, but when I read your posts, I get the feeling you're talking really fast, really loud, and are very excited and more than a bit angry.

Am I somehow reading tone into your posts that isn't there?

You are. And Penitent Engines are proably the worst unit in the codex. If you're being allowed to use them effectively, you are not playing anything like what he is talking about An open topped F11, R10 walker for 80 points? Maybe if the FAQ gave them more attacks? I don't know if it did, but even then, they are terrible.

Compare it to a BA dreadnought: The Penitent has 2 less BS, 1 less Strength, 1 less front and side armour., 1 less initiative and one more attack. Furthermore, where the Penitents have flamers, meaning they are useless unless they manage to walk up (with 6 inches move and too big to hide behind anything) the dread has a multi melta. The dread also isn't open topped. The dread also has the option of being dropped in by pod. The dread is just better all around. And yet dreads are (rightly so) considered very bad. The Penitent Engines are worse.

They're so easy to pop as they lumber along, that they shouldn't really get into combat. But even if the BA brainfarts and does choose them to charge into, well, they have S5 on the charge, so they'll still rip right through it.

A few things. First, we're talking about Death Company Marines' ability to fight Penitent Engines in melee, not a Dreadnought versus Dreadnought comparison. If you're gonna use the Dreadnought then we can just have Melta Dominions melt the crap out of it like they do to any other vehicle or rain Exorcist missiles on it until it dies. Stop changing the subject when you realize that Sisters actually can do stuff against Blood Angels sometimes.

Second, Penitent Engines have d6+1 attacks, Maybe more with the revamp to dreadnought attacks in the FAQs once they get to Sisters. And for every unsaved wound they inflict, they get another attack immediately. They have Dreadnought CCWs, so armor saves, ability to wound, and FNP are irrelevant. And they effectively have the "fixed" version of the Furioso Blood Talons' special rule.

Third, a Penitent Engine's ballistic skill is completely irrelevant to everything, as its only ranged weapons are two heavy flamers, which don't roll to hit. It serves only to let it actually fire its flamers.

Fourth, six heavy flamers firing Overwatch against T4 infantry are very, very likely going to cause some casualties. Assuming flamers on Dreadnoughts CAN be fired as Overwatch, anyways.

Fifth, one less strength on the PE is irrelevant, as it's impossible to have a Strength above 10 anyways and if all of a Dreadnought's CCWs are busted (the only time its base strength would matter in this case) then it doesn't matter what its stats are, it's going to die in melee to infantry with Krak Grenades or watch those infantry run away on the grounds they can't physically hurt it.

Sixth, Death Company with Strength 5 glance a Penitent Engine on 6s. They need to inflict 6 6s to take out all of them, which requires around 36 hits on average. I don't know the Death Company's WS but I imagine they're hitting on 4s. Which means that the Death Company squad needs to be able to deliver around 72 attacks to take out the squadron, unless I miscalculated something. And if they fail to take them out, they're stuck with krak grenades.

First of all, I said they shouldn't be charging them at all. I even called it a brainfart. So no, I'm not changing the subject. My point was that they are worse than everyone else's dreads, or at best equal, and no one takes dreads because they're terrible. Mostly because they die easy, and guess whose walkers die easiest of everyone's? Well, maybe Orks, I don't actually know that book. But other than that, probably Sisters.

Second, those Death Company will have 5 attacks each on the charge. Then they get Astorath and they reroll to hit, reroll to wound and if you put a sanguinary priest in the unit they have WS5 and hit on 3+, but honestly, that's not needed, because they'll get those 6 6s like child's play.

So say there's 10 of them, that's 50 attacks, should be about 37 hits rounding down (without the sanguinary priest) which is 6 6s in the first roll and another 5 in the second roll. Will 11 6s do it, you think?

But again, they shouldn't be charging that unit to begin with, and they have free reign over where to charge. And when they charge on the opposite side of the table from where you have your walkers, good luck getting them there before the end of the game.

 Purifier wrote:
First of all, I said they shouldn't be charging them at all. I even called it a brainfart. So no, I'm not changing the subject. My point was that they are worse than everyone else's dreads, or at best equal, and no one takes dreads because they're terrible. Mostly because they die easy, and guess whose walkers die easiest of everyone's? Well, maybe Orks, I don't actually know that book. But other than that, probably Sisters.

Second, those Death Company will have 5 attacks each on the charge. Then they get Astorath and they reroll to hit, reroll to wound and if you put a sanguinary priest in the unit they have WS5 and hit on 3+, but honestly, that's not needed, because they'll get those 6 6s like child's play.

So say there's 10 of them, that's 50 attacks, should be about 37 hits rounding down (without the sanguinary priest) which is 6 6s in the first roll and another 5 in the second roll. Will 11 6s do it, you think?

But again, they shouldn't be charging that unit to begin with, and they have free reign over where to charge. And when they charge on the opposite side of the table from where you have your walkers, good luck getting them there before the end of the game.

So on average they inflict barely enough damage to wipe them out on round one. And then after that if they get a bit unlucky and any Penitent Engines survive, they have to use Krak Grenades because they're back to S4 and can't hurt AV11 with their normal attacks, even on 6s.

Also, what's the initiative situation like? Who's going first? I'm legitimately asking, as my units' initiatives haven't been relevant in a long time since my mom plays Orks all the time. If they're going at the same time I feel really confident the Penitent Engines are going to inflict a HELL of a lot of damage and have a good chance of wiping out the Death Company even if they also get wiped out themselves.

Also in the situation you described, it wouldn't be too hard to get the Penitent Engines to the Death Company. Just head straight for them - they're coming in the Penitent Engines' direction, as the DC are rolling up a battle line that the Penitent Engines are at the end of.

Oh, and if the DC don't charge the PE and get charged instead, they're at S4 and can't get 5 attacks each due to not being able to hurt AV11. So it's 1 Krak grenade each.

Slayerfan summed it up exactly. The fact that purifier thinks dc in a raven is remotely viable in a general sense does lend credence to credibility as a ba player.

Martel732 wrote:
Slayerfan summed it up exactly. The fact that purifier thinks dc in a raven is remotely viable in a general sense does lend credence to credibility as a ba player.

And you summed it up perfectly when you said that the fact that top table players want to ally something from BA proves that they're the worst codex in the game. Laughable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
So on average they inflict barely enough damage to wipe them out on round one.

No, on average they whipe them out round 1 and spill over a few wounds. And that's not counting Astorath's own attacks.

Get charged on? How are you gonna charge them when they're in a flying assault vehicle? You can't. You *will* be charged on. And I'm counting them with their standard gear. No upgrades. Of course they have things they can put on there if they want to... but they don't need to.
And they're marines, which means I4, so you will always hit last.

I don't even play Sisters anymore, and I thuroughly enjoyed them when I did. I take offense at Martel's absoulte constant whining and his insistance that BA is the worst codex in the game and Sisters is top of mid tier. It's a ridiculous notion to say that Sisters is a good codex. It's missing so many big things. It has no "Big Guy" like everyone else has gotten. The heaviest thing it has is the exorcist, and if BA had that he would be bemoaning its randomness. They have no formations. They have no fliers. They have no AA. It has a few things that it does fairly well (but in the words of Martel "others do it better!") but it is a lacking codex to say the least.

Orks is worse though.

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Slayerfan summed it up exactly. The fact that purifier thinks dc in a raven is remotely viable in a general sense does lend credence to credibility as a ba player.

And you summed it up perfectly when you said that the fact that top table players want to ally something from BA proves that they're the worst codex in the game. Laughable.

I feel like you both missed the word "not" in your posts somewhere.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
So on average they inflict barely enough damage to wipe them out on round one.

No, on average they whipe them out round 1 and spill over a few wounds. And that's not counting Astorath's own attacks.

Get charged on? How are you gonna charge them when they're in a flying assault vehicle? You can't. You *will* be charged on. And I'm counting them with their standard gear. No upgrades. Of course they have things they can put on there if they want to... but they don't need to.
And they're marines, which means I4, so you will always hit last.

Where does the Death Company's second batch of attacks in one round come from?

Well, in the situation you laid out where the Penitent Engines are on the opposite end of the battleline, a completely viable scenario is that the Blood Angels wipe out a Sisters of Battle unit, then it's the Sisters of Battle turn, then the Penitent Engines charge them. Personally if I were using my Penitent Engines as an anti-melee unit I'd place them behind my lines in the middle, not way off on one end.

Also initiative 4 is not completely unheard of in the Sisters of Battle Codex, but yes, Penitent Engines have Initiative 3 so would be going last.

So, yeah, Penitent Engines would take too much damage and probably wouldn't work.

What about a Battle Conclave?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:
I don't even play Sisters anymore, and I thuroughly enjoyed them when I did. I take offense at Martel's absoulte constant whining and his insistance that BA is the worst codex in the game and Sisters is top of mid tier. It's a ridiculous notion to say that Sisters is a good codex. It's missing so many big things. It has no "Big Guy" like everyone else has gotten. The heaviest thing it has is the exorcist, and if BA had that he would be bemoaning its randomness. They have no formations. They have no fliers. They have no AA. It has a few things that it does fairly well (but in the words of Martel "others do it better!") but it is a lacking codex to say the least.

Orks is worse though.

Why would you need a massive unit? I was under the impression most people thought Lords of War were one of the things ruining tabletop. Also, Sisters don't actually have such a large unit in the lore so far as I know.

They have formations. They may not be much good, but they do have them.

Do fliers and AA really matter in a meta where no one takes them anyways? You're basically saying, "Boy, I sure wish Sisters had fliers and AA units so I could not be using them at any time."

Why does any of this even matter?

 oni wrote:
Why does any of this even matter?

I... don't even know.

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Slayerfan summed it up exactly. The fact that purifier thinks dc in a raven is remotely viable in a general sense does lend credence to credibility as a ba player.

And you summed it up perfectly when you said that the fact that top table players want to ally something from BA proves that they're the worst codex in the game. Laughable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
So on average they inflict barely enough damage to wipe them out on round one.

No, on average they whipe them out round 1 and spill over a few wounds. And that's not counting Astorath's own attacks.

Get charged on? How are you gonna charge them when they're in a flying assault vehicle? You can't. You *will* be charged on. And I'm counting them with their standard gear. No upgrades. Of course they have things they can put on there if they want to... but they don't need to.
And they're marines, which means I4, so you will always hit last.

I don't even play Sisters anymore, and I thuroughly enjoyed them when I did. I take offense at Martel's absoulte constant whining and his insistance that BA is the worst codex in the game and Sisters is top of mid tier. It's a ridiculous notion to say that Sisters is a good codex. It's missing so many big things. It has no "Big Guy" like everyone else has gotten. The heaviest thing it has is the exorcist, and if BA had that he would be bemoaning its randomness. They have no formations. They have no fliers. They have no AA. It has a few things that it does fairly well (but in the words of Martel "others do it better!") but it is a lacking codex to say the least.

Orks is worse though.

I'd rather ally in 3 Exorcists than 2 Priests. FNP is nice but it is only a marginal improvement over Iron Hands, and honestly TWC can get a 6+++ from their own dude and then a 4++ from Azrael. The only thing they were really allied in for was more Drop Pods and that was stopped.

The army will almost disappear entirely. Watch.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Slayerfan summed it up exactly. The fact that purifier thinks dc in a raven is remotely viable in a general sense does lend credence to credibility as a ba player.

And you summed it up perfectly when you said that the fact that top table players want to ally something from BA proves that they're the worst codex in the game. Laughable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
So on average they inflict barely enough damage to wipe them out on round one.

No, on average they whipe them out round 1 and spill over a few wounds. And that's not counting Astorath's own attacks.

Get charged on? How are you gonna charge them when they're in a flying assault vehicle? You can't. You *will* be charged on. And I'm counting them with their standard gear. No upgrades. Of course they have things they can put on there if they want to... but they don't need to.
And they're marines, which means I4, so you will always hit last.

I don't even play Sisters anymore, and I thuroughly enjoyed them when I did. I take offense at Martel's absoulte constant whining and his insistance that BA is the worst codex in the game and Sisters is top of mid tier. It's a ridiculous notion to say that Sisters is a good codex. It's missing so many big things. It has no "Big Guy" like everyone else has gotten. The heaviest thing it has is the exorcist, and if BA had that he would be bemoaning its randomness. They have no formations. They have no fliers. They have no AA. It has a few things that it does fairly well (but in the words of Martel "others do it better!") but it is a lacking codex to say the least.

Orks is worse though.

I'd rather ally in 3 Exorcists than 2 Priests. FNP is nice but it is only a marginal improvement over Iron Hands, and honestly TWC can get a 6+++ from their own dude and then a 4++ from Azrael. The only thing they were really allied in for was more Drop Pods and that was stopped.

The army will almost disappear entirely. Watch.

Exorcists (Sisters of Battle), Thunderwolf Cavalry (Space Wolves) and Azrael (Dark Angels) in one army...

You seriously give zero feths about any concept of lore, don't you?

I mean, anyone can not care. It takes real effort to not give a feth.

I am still laughing at all the "muh mureens ur bad" players, but it is a bitter laugh.
Try playing an army where you dont get armour saves, where you roll bucket loads of dice to get a couple of wounds and your heavy hitters have been systematically nerfed in to the ground.
Welcome to the Guard.

Or alternatively you can keep on "muh poor mureens" and invariably GW will give you yet another hand out.

 master of ordinance wrote:
I am still laughing at all the "muh mureens ur bad" players, but it is a bitter laugh.
Try playing an army where you dont get armour saves, where you roll bucket loads of dice to get a couple of wounds and your heavy hitters have been systematically nerfed in to the ground.
Welcome to the Guard.

Or alternatively you can keep on "muh poor mureens" and invariably GW will give you yet another hand out.

Sisters of Battle have a dedicated melee unit with no armor save at all. Like, not even against lasguns.

Their lore calls them a suicide unit and their gameplay matches that concept completely.

 Pouncey wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
I am still laughing at all the "muh mureens ur bad" players, but it is a bitter laugh.
Try playing an army where you dont get armour saves, where you roll bucket loads of dice to get a couple of wounds and your heavy hitters have been systematically nerfed in to the ground.
Welcome to the Guard.

Or alternatively you can keep on "muh poor mureens" and invariably GW will give you yet another hand out.

Sisters of Battle have a dedicated melee unit with no armor save at all. Like, not even against lasguns.

Their lore calls them a suicide unit and their gameplay matches that concept completely.

Now you see, thats a suicide unit.
The Guard infantry are main line fighters.

 Pouncey wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Slayerfan summed it up exactly. The fact that purifier thinks dc in a raven is remotely viable in a general sense does lend credence to credibility as a ba player.

And you summed it up perfectly when you said that the fact that top table players want to ally something from BA proves that they're the worst codex in the game. Laughable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
So on average they inflict barely enough damage to wipe them out on round one.

No, on average they whipe them out round 1 and spill over a few wounds. And that's not counting Astorath's own attacks.

Get charged on? How are you gonna charge them when they're in a flying assault vehicle? You can't. You *will* be charged on. And I'm counting them with their standard gear. No upgrades. Of course they have things they can put on there if they want to... but they don't need to.
And they're marines, which means I4, so you will always hit last.

I don't even play Sisters anymore, and I thuroughly enjoyed them when I did. I take offense at Martel's absoulte constant whining and his insistance that BA is the worst codex in the game and Sisters is top of mid tier. It's a ridiculous notion to say that Sisters is a good codex. It's missing so many big things. It has no "Big Guy" like everyone else has gotten. The heaviest thing it has is the exorcist, and if BA had that he would be bemoaning its randomness. They have no formations. They have no fliers. They have no AA. It has a few things that it does fairly well (but in the words of Martel "others do it better!") but it is a lacking codex to say the least.

Orks is worse though.

I'd rather ally in 3 Exorcists than 2 Priests. FNP is nice but it is only a marginal improvement over Iron Hands, and honestly TWC can get a 6+++ from their own dude and then a 4++ from Azrael. The only thing they were really allied in for was more Drop Pods and that was stopped.

The army will almost disappear entirely. Watch.

Exorcists (Sisters of Battle), Thunderwolf Cavalry (Space Wolves) and Azrael (Dark Angels) in one army...

You seriously give zero feths about any concept of lore, don't you?

I mean, anyone can not care. It takes real effort to not give a feth.

Well, they'd only be Sisters + Iron Hands to represent lizard men in space (slightly more durability and then you got Sisters as "Skinks"). However, you are correct in that I care more about the possibility of what lists can be created. In a vote votewar I participated in I had a Salamanders and Iron Hands army that made little sense and I just wanted to fit a bunch of blasts in it.

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
I am still laughing at all the "muh mureens ur bad" players, but it is a bitter laugh.
Try playing an army where you dont get armour saves, where you roll bucket loads of dice to get a couple of wounds and your heavy hitters have been systematically nerfed in to the ground.
Welcome to the Guard.

Or alternatively you can keep on "muh poor mureens" and invariably GW will give you yet another hand out.

Sisters of Battle have a dedicated melee unit with no armor save at all. Like, not even against lasguns.

Their lore calls them a suicide unit and their gameplay matches that concept completely.

Now you see, thats a suicide unit.
The Guard infantry are main line fighters.

The Guard infantry use attrition as their main weapon. Their job is basically a long, slow mass-suicide mission.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
They've always been a GK parallel.

The two differences are that their shtick is Xenos hunting rather than Daemon hunting and they openly recruit known Xenos killers from other chapters rather than doing everything in secret.

Cool.

What's the Witch hunting equivalent of the Deathwatch and Grey Knights? And will they ever get a stupidly-overpowered Codex and badass new models one day?

Black Templar and I doubt it, they recently got 'shafted' back into the Vanilla Marine codex. Not so much a shafting in terms of power, more a loss of identity and flavour.

 Pouncey wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Slayerfan summed it up exactly. The fact that purifier thinks dc in a raven is remotely viable in a general sense does lend credence to credibility as a ba player.

And you summed it up perfectly when you said that the fact that top table players want to ally something from BA proves that they're the worst codex in the game. Laughable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
So on average they inflict barely enough damage to wipe them out on round one.

No, on average they whipe them out round 1 and spill over a few wounds. And that's not counting Astorath's own attacks.

Get charged on? How are you gonna charge them when they're in a flying assault vehicle? You can't. You *will* be charged on. And I'm counting them with their standard gear. No upgrades. Of course they have things they can put on there if they want to... but they don't need to.
And they're marines, which means I4, so you will always hit last.

I don't even play Sisters anymore, and I thuroughly enjoyed them when I did. I take offense at Martel's absoulte constant whining and his insistance that BA is the worst codex in the game and Sisters is top of mid tier. It's a ridiculous notion to say that Sisters is a good codex. It's missing so many big things. It has no "Big Guy" like everyone else has gotten. The heaviest thing it has is the exorcist, and if BA had that he would be bemoaning its randomness. They have no formations. They have no fliers. They have no AA. It has a few things that it does fairly well (but in the words of Martel "others do it better!") but it is a lacking codex to say the least.

Orks is worse though.

I'd rather ally in 3 Exorcists than 2 Priests. FNP is nice but it is only a marginal improvement over Iron Hands, and honestly TWC can get a 6+++ from their own dude and then a 4++ from Azrael. The only thing they were really allied in for was more Drop Pods and that was stopped.

The army will almost disappear entirely. Watch.

Exorcists (Sisters of Battle), Thunderwolf Cavalry (Space Wolves) and Azrael (Dark Angels) in one army...

You seriously give zero feths about any concept of lore, don't you?

I mean, anyone can not care. It takes real effort to not give a feth.

I actively reject the lore, as it has no bearing on the game at all.